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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Tomb Raider vs Street Fighter Double Standards

gabzjmm23 on 21 June 2015

lets just enjoy if games are on the consoles you own. stop the hate.



Around the Network
Mad55 on 21 June 2015
Mmmfishtacos said:
ROBOTECHHEAVEN said:
their is no difference between this deal with sf5 and tr, and if anyone actually believes that to be then u are a fanboy of that system , pure and simple. square-enix was not happy with the sales of tomb raider reboot which is a stated fact, cant argue that even if u wanted too. so they released a definitive edition and that helped it finally be a success in square-enix's eyes , which ( cd ) themselves even said a stated fact. both sony and ms are helping develope the games, ms paying around 50% i wager and sony paying probably all of it that is the only difference between the deals. ms also stated many many many damn times, phil himself said as well that the deal with tomb raider is like the ones they made with ryse son of rome and dead rising 3, u can look that up if u dont believe me.

so in another words, if the game does come out on another system it will be on pc, just like ryse and dr3. the only possible way i can see tomb raider hitting a ps system is if square-enix pulls a ea and pays ms for the publishing rights, ( like ea did to get mass effect 1 on a ps system , which is a stated fact )....


Good god, get off the square was not happy with the sales of tomb raider, Square had unrealistic expectations the game would sell 6 million in a month. Very few games do that, they set them self's up for their own disappointment, on top of that they miss manged game development which cost them way too much money to make like all their games. When this deal was made TR was north of 7 million sold across all platforms. Please explain to me how they needed the deal again? 

 

Lets also ignore the fact it was announced as what seemed to be a Multi plat game and then later it was exclusive for the holidays. Sounds like Square really need the money to make this game... 

Your asking for facts, but then say they miss managed game development and set themselves up for failure with no proof of that or inside information to support your claim. 



taus90 on 21 June 2015
Aura7541 said:
Teflon02 said:
I wasn't goina say anything BUT.... I think I need to.
The Situations.

Bayonetta 2:
- Was originally released released as a mature game on PS3 and 360, skipping Nintendo.
- People were dying for a sequel and it was announced
- Shockingly it was announced for the system that is mainly aimed at the opposing audience
- On top of that neither of the consoles that had the original were getting the sequel
- The backlash wasn't about Nintendo doing bad, it was about how stupid that was to the public
- Most people playing it likely didn't care for Wii U
That's ALL understandable, why they did it made sense when explained, though still not wise. The backlash made sense as well. If they started responding to backlash unprofessionally then they are in the wrong. They had to expect it with the choices made.

The Rise of Tomb Raider:
- Tomb Raider PS3 outsells 360 by more than half a mill that's fine
- They announce Rise of the Tomb Raider, as a Multiplatform title
- THEN announce a definitive edition of the 2013 Title for PS4 and Xbox One
- The PS4 version sells more than double the Xbox version
- Microsoft announces out of nowhere that it's a Xbox exclusive
- Later Square or CD reps had to clarify that it's timed
- NOTHING about that made sense
- The game was already well on it's way o PS4 and Xbox One and now loses it's bigger fanbase plus PC for this crap because Microsoft admittingly just wanted something to go against uncharted which doesn't matter anymore seeing the delay
- Microsoft saying they're help develop the game means nothing. If they threw mills at SE and CD that means they contributed to the games construction. Means nothing.

Street Fighter V:
- Street Fighter IV sold over a mill more on PS3
- Capcom from 2 years or so ago said they didn't have the resources to make a new Street Fighter
- Street Fighter 4 came to PS4 ONLY as a promotion for Street Fighter V
- They announced it as it was. An actual exclusive
- Sony is making the game with Capcom and are the reason it currently exists
- Sony despite making the game and having an exclusive iteration deal for V STILL giving PC it and letting it cross play

Last time I checked Windows is MS not Sony. Yet Sony is doing it better with it's exclusive deals lol

Big differences:
Nintendo's Backlash was fan frustration understandable, but Nintendo's not in the wrong.
Microsoft's Backlash was anti-gamer actions and taking away from PC and PS4 instead of gaining more for Xbox.
Sony's No Backlash was, a way more acceptable form of Nintendo's situation. PC still gets as well so dropping the weakest of the current series supported consoles isn't much of an issue. Also 2 of the playing platform choices still exist.

Thanks for this, Teflon. Apparently, a lot of people overlooked this post. The only correction I will make is SFV is console exclusive, not full on exclusive.

Unfortunately people will still ignore it, as this doesnt benefit their argument



DerNebel on 21 June 2015
ClassicGamingWizzz said:

 

green_sky said:

Double standards and bags full of hypocrisy. It was the same when Devil May Cry 4 went multi-platform. Not even exclusive or timed exclusive, just multi-platform so more people can enjoy the series. http://news.softpedia.com/news/Devil-May-Cry-4-Fans-Threaten-to-Boycott-Capcom-50159.shtml

It was 10 times worse when FF13 was also going to be on xbox 360. Hardcore forum gamers are the worst.

Edit: Barely any outrage when Bioshock came to PS3, Mass Effect and many others. 

You talk like its one fanbase worse than the other and start the post with double standarts.

Here one example for you

http://www.exlgaming.com/xboxorweriot-is-the-result-of-sony-getting-marketing-rights-for-call-of-duty/

#Xboxmasterrace lol, anybody that uses the term master race to describe the community he's part of and is serious about that, is an idiot.

And this comes apparently from one of the dudes that started this things a "professional CoD player" (he deleated the tweet since):

"Trust me PS4 kids you don't want Xbox players switching, our pub players make your best "comp team" look like campaign bots #XboxOrWeRiot

— MLG Grizzly™ (@GrizzMLG)"

Lol, what is this? Kindergarten? :D



green_sky on 21 June 2015
ClassicGamingWizzz said:

You talk like its one fanbase worse than the other and start the post with double standarts.

Here one example for you

http://www.exlgaming.com/xboxorweriot-is-the-result-of-sony-getting-marketing-rights-for-call-of-duty/

I dunno why you are offended. I said hardcore forum gamers and not playstation gamers. That is what Jim Sterling said...http://www.destructoid.com/fact-ps3-fanboys-are-the-worst-149259.phtml

Marketing rights sounds bit of joke thing. Kind of like that hardcore Final Fantasy fan and japanese expert video. 

 



Around the Network
Scoobes on 21 June 2015
IamAwsome said:
Normchacho said:

Wait? How was it not? It's just a regular timed exclusivity deal isn't it? Which let me be clear isn't the issue people had with the TR deal. Timed deals really aren't new or uncommon. The two main issues people had with it were that a significant majority of TR fans don't own an Xbox (60% of people who bought the last TR on console bought it on a PS) and just how badly they handled the announcement.

But back on topic. As I said earlier, the SFV deal and the TR deal are very different. So the OPs assertion that anyone who was upset about TR but not SFV is a hypocrite is just plain silly.

Because as I pointed out, Square Enix sought a partner for the game to make (extra) profits. Whether or not they really needed a partner is up for debate, but that's on them not MS. Whoever partnered would have gotten the game early. The bad PR thing I agree with. 

The one problem that I have with the "most TR fans are on PS" arguement is that most Japanese games and older games have fanbases on PlayStaton and/or Nintendo. Should MS just not bother and never take a chance with those games? How will they build a fanbase for those titles? Yes the PS4 is outselling the XB1 but still. Should they never touch those games? 

They could build their own fanbase by creating a new franchise/IP. They were already getting the TR game as a multiplatform so they could have invested in another studio building a new game and developing a new fanbase. Its worked for Halo, Forza, Gears and to a lesser extent Fable. It's also what Sony did with the first Uncharted game and managed to influence the development of future TR games.




Get your Portable ID!

Aura7541 on 21 June 2015
ClassicGamingWizzz said:

You talk like its one fanbase worse than the other and start the post with double standarts.

Here one example for you

http://www.exlgaming.com/xboxorweriot-is-the-result-of-sony-getting-marketing-rights-for-call-of-duty/

I saw that and I have to say, it was hilarious

taus90 said:

Unfortunately people will still ignore it, as this doesnt benefit their argument

Yeah... The people who think the two situations are the same have already made up their minds and therefore, no amount of evidence is going to convince them otherwise.



LLBean on 21 June 2015

For one thing SF is just s fighting game.TR has a bigger fan base on PS so of course the REAL fans are angry.Would wouldn't they be? TR started in PS and has always been on PS systems and RoTR was obviously in the making for the PS4 and MS paid for it to be delayed.



DerNebel on 21 June 2015
LLBean said:
For one thing SF is just s fighting game.TR has a bigger fan base on PS so of course the REAL fans are angry.Would wouldn't they be? TR started in PS and has always been on PS systems and RoTR was obviously in the making for the PS4 and MS paid for it to be delayed.

Just a fighting game seems to be quite the understatement, I fully expect SFV on PS4 to outsell RoTR on X1.



LLBean on 21 June 2015
Scoobes said:
IamAwsome said:
Normchacho said:

Wait? How was it not? It's just a regular timed exclusivity deal isn't it? Which let me be clear isn't the issue people had with the TR deal. Timed deals really aren't new or uncommon. The two main issues people had with it were that a significant majority of TR fans don't own an Xbox (60% of people who bought the last TR on console bought it on a PS) and just how badly they handled the announcement.

But back on topic. As I said earlier, the SFV deal and the TR deal are very different. So the OPs assertion that anyone who was upset about TR but not SFV is a hypocrite is just plain silly.

Because as I pointed out, Square Enix sought a partner for the game to make (extra) profits. Whether or not they really needed a partner is up for debate, but that's on them not MS. Whoever partnered would have gotten the game early. The bad PR thing I agree with. 

The one problem that I have with the "most TR fans are on PS" arguement is that most Japanese games and older games have fanbases on PlayStaton and/or Nintendo. Should MS just not bother and never take a chance with those games? How will they build a fanbase for those titles? Yes the PS4 is outselling the XB1 but still. Should they never touch those games? 

They could build their own fanbase by creating a new franchise/IP. They were already getting the TR game as a multiplatform so they could have invested in another studio building a new game and developing a new fanbase. Its worked for Halo, Forza, Gears and to a lesser extent Fable. It's also what Sony did with the first Uncharted game and managed to influence the development of future TR games.


Right,this is what my issue is mainly and they don't even own the game.Sony is making games like Horizon and Dreams while MS is paying for timed exclusives again.Does not help the X1 in the long run.