Rise of the Tomb Raider coming to PC in early 2016, PS4 in holiday 2016

[+E.Worm Jimmy Subscriber¹]

I'm saying what SE has said, and what the Tomb Raider head guy said, at the end of the day we can either go with that on the record or not, up to each person.  Regardless, in the larger span of things, with so much hoopla over this, you'd think it'd be a 20million unit seller, but it's not.   With the re-release on PS4/XB1 it's up to 8.4, maybe now 9million copies, that's fine, but you'd think with people moaning about how it's this big hot property it'd be selling double what it actually did.    Maybe that's what SE expected as well, specially in it's first few months when it barely made it to ~4million.      It sounds like it took 5-6million copies for SE to finally make it's money back on it, if we believe that then they either overspent on development, or probably overspent on marketing and distribution, which is why they're more than happy to let MS publish and take care of that side of things.

 

 

at 3.5 mil they said that they didn't make AS MUCH as they expected.   they were clearly not at a loss, but they just did not meet the profit forecasts!  

basically they made much less money then they hoped for, not that it took to 5-6 million sales to make the money back

now they have met the forecast and then some as they sold 8.4 mil since the begging of April, and had an extra 4 month since!

it is a blockbuster, even if the start was slower then they expected (at it was by no means a slow start at all... just not as fast as they hoped)

Edited July 29, 2015 by e.worm jimmmy

[George P Global Moderator]

at 3.5 mil they said that they didn't make AS MUCH as they expected.   they were clearly not at a loss, but they just did not meet the profit forecasts!  

basically they made much less money then they hoped for, not that it took to 5-6 million sales to make the money back

now they have met the forecast and then some as they sold 8.4 mil since the begging of April, and had an extra 4 month since!

it is a blockbuster, even if the start was slower then they expected (at it was by no means a slow start at all... just not as fast as they hoped)

That's not what it sounded like to me, the head studio boss, who's name I forget, said that it "become profitable" at the end of the year, this was back in January or early February as they were getting the re-release for PS4/XB1 out.   The way he said it, makes it sound like it didn't make money till the 5-6million mark that it hit in January, not the initial 3.5million in the first month.

At the end we're just parsing what SE and CD people have said, we don't know what it's budget was and how much was spent.  What we do know is that AAA development is going up and up, these big name games cost lots to make, lots to market, and so on.  

While it's a success, in the end, it's not as big of one as you'd think with all the moaning over the timed exclusivity deal would make you think.  Chalk it up to the typical vocal minority on the internet maybe, but you'd think it was some 20million+ seller, when it's not.

[Morisato]

Good for PC users. By the time the year is up, they'll just be selling the GOTY edition instead. Good way to save a bunch

[perochan]

well, damn. Been playing Tomb Raider it is pretty fun. Too bad not coming to PS3...

[Mr. Gibs]

However a game that is going to come out on both consoles but one of those consoles purchases exclusive rights for the game for one year? I am not for that. To me that is anti consumer. If this was an XB1 exclusive outright I would have zero issue. It is not, and I just feel this is not a good outcome for gamers overall. If I can have a choice, I want that choice as soon as possible. I do not appreciate being forced into it, which is all that is going down here. I am being forced into playing it on the One, and that is uncool.

That makes no sense.

Timed exclusives give everyone a chance to play the game, just that they have to wait. Permanent exclusives force you to buy the system just to play the game. 

You said you don't appreciate being forced into it and that you're being forced into playing it on the one...but if it was permanently exclusive on the PS4 then you'd be forced into buying a PS4 just to play the game.

While I think the 1 year exclusivity is a bit ridiculous (it should be a couple of months max) I still prefer timed exclusives over permanent ones.

[LaP]

That's not what it sounded like to me, the head studio boss, who's name I forget, said that it "become profitable" at the end of the year, this was back in January or early February as they were getting the re-release for PS4/XB1 out.   The way he said it, makes it sound like it didn't make money till the 5-6million mark that it hit in January, not the initial 3.5million in the first month.

At the end we're just parsing what SE and CD people have said, we don't know what it's budget was and how much was spent.  What we do know is that AAA development is going up and up, these big name games cost lots to make, lots to market, and so on.  

While it's a success, in the end, it's not as big of one as you'd think with all the moaning over the timed exclusivity deal would make you think.  Chalk it up to the typical vocal minority on the internet maybe, but you'd think it was some 20million+ seller, when it's not.

What did you expect them to say after signing a timed exclusivity deal for the next tomb raider for god sake. "Tomb Raider sold well but to be a bunch of *** we will prevent PC and PS gamers to play the next installment day one because we want to make more money."? If you expected them to say that then you are naive. They tried to cover their *** for the decision they made. It is as simple as that.

If Tomb Raider lost money with the number of copies sold then very few games make money. Like not even 10% of them.

Good for PC users. By the time the year is up, they'll just be selling the GOTY edition instead. Good way to save a bunch

I would not bet on that. They might pull a Rockstar on us. If they do they wont get my money i'll wait for the game to be at 5$. I'm a very patient man.

[George P Global Moderator]

What did you expect them to say after signing a timed exclusivity deal for the next tomb raider for god sake. "Tomb Raider sold well but to be a bunch of *** we will prevent PC and PS gamers to play the next installment day one because we want to make more money."? If you expected them to say that then you are naive. They tried to cover their *** for the decision they made. It is as simple as that.

If Tomb Raider lost money with the number of copies sold then very few games make money. Like not even 10% of them.

Not every game has the same budget, some can make money with 1million, some need 5million or more, I'm sure the game made money, just later in it's life compared to at the start which probably didn't help SE bottom line for that quarter so they complained about it.  It doesn't help matters when it's a title that's multiplatform and has a higher budget just from the fact it's going to be released on 5 systems instead of 1 or 2-3.

 

In the end of the day, I can live with timed exclusives for 3rd party games compared to full exclusivity, I'm in no mad rush to play things on day 1, I played the first tomb raider 4-5 months after it's release, I haven't gotten the new Batman game yet and it's one I want to play.  I can wait, and in many cases waiting helps, specially if something is a buggy mess on day one.