We don't know how much of an incentive they were given for timed exclusivity. Maybe it was a lot? Maybe it was worth it?
It would need to be a truly enormous amount. It's sold really badly. We are talking being beaten on "the best month ever for hardware and software sales" by Just Dance 2016.
I just hope after the exclusivity ends the PS4/PC base manage to make it sell enough to continue the franchise.
Imagine the world where it sells terribly, but juuuust barely well enough to convince someone at SE that the series could be successful with another reboot.
And then in 2018 we got The Tomb Raider, 4th reboot of the series.
0
Big DookieSmells great!Houston, TXRegistered Userregular
I'm assuming those numbers also don't account for digital sales.
It's not saving it. NPD came out today and it failed to chart in the top 10. There is no other valid conclusion than the sales being an unmitigated disaster.
That's probably it for Tomb Raider as a franchise knowing how stupid Square/Enix is. Who on earth thought this was ever a good idea?
The Xbox 360 had fewer sales of Tomb Raider 2013 than the PS3 did
The Xbox One had fewer sales of the Definitive Edition than the PS4 did
The Xbox One has fewer hardware sales than the PS4 does
They launched the game on a platform that has had fewer sales of the franchise, fewer hardware sales than the competitor, and as a bonus they did this alongside the release of Fallout 4.
Here's hoping that the "early 2016" date for the PC version holds up.
Despite the plaintive cries of the video game playing populace, I am pretty sure Microsoft and Square knew what they were getting themselves into. I just wish MS had bought the whole IP and turned it into their Uncharted.
Despite the plaintive cries of the video game playing populace, I am pretty sure Microsoft and Square knew what they were getting themselves into. I just wish MS had bought the whole IP and turned it into their Uncharted.
The nerdrage would be too great if they did that though. Could you imagine how hard people would be whining if that was the situation and the sales were like this? :P
“I used to draw, hard to admit that I used to draw...”
I heard they were going to shut down all videogames because of it. All investors are so afraid that a AAAAA+ franchise like Tomb Raider couldn't even make the Xbox beat Sony, they're pulling out funding across the industry for all video games and going into televised rat fighting.
+2
Johnny ChopsockyScootaloo! We have to cook!Grillin' HaysenburgersRegistered Userregular
I heard they were going to shut down all videogames because of it. All investors are so afraid that a AAAAA+ franchise like Tomb Raider couldn't even make the Xbox beat Sony, they're pulling out funding across the industry for all video games and going into televised rat fighting.
They called me mad, but who's got the last laugh now?!
Currently Playing:
The Division, Warframe (XB1)
GT: Tanith 6227
The thing is, they made it exclusive to their system for a little while before the PC version and a full year before the PS4
A year may as well be a forever exclusive in video game time, so I doubt MS buying it and making it a true exclusive would have boosted sales at all. The game was a system seller for me, but I recognize that I'm a very niche case. I don't think sales of the game would be much, if at all, improved by locking it up on their system
0
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
I'm assuming those numbers also don't account for digital sales.
It's not saving it. NPD came out today and it failed to chart in the top 10. There is no other valid conclusion than the sales being an unmitigated disaster.
That's probably it for Tomb Raider as a franchise knowing how stupid Square/Enix is. Who on earth thought this was ever a good idea?
Well, this seems like a bit of an overreaction.
Just a tad.
You obviously don't follow Square that much, given Rise was apparently at risk of never being made in the first place (despite 8.5 million sales for the reboot).
I for one will be disappointed, but not surprised, if a third game is never made due to this.
Despite the plaintive cries of the video game playing populace, I am pretty sure Microsoft and Square knew what they were getting themselves into. I just wish MS had bought the whole IP and turned it into their Uncharted.
I'm assuming those numbers also don't account for digital sales.
It's not saving it. NPD came out today and it failed to chart in the top 10. There is no other valid conclusion than the sales being an unmitigated disaster.
That's probably it for Tomb Raider as a franchise knowing how stupid Square/Enix is. Who on earth thought this was ever a good idea?
Well, this seems like a bit of an overreaction.
Just a tad.
It's not really. This is November sales we're talking about. The same month as Black Friday/Cyber Monday. The month where people buy all of the things. Those would be poor sales numbers for an exclusive in any given month, but for November they are especially bad.
We don't know how much of an incentive they were given for timed exclusivity. Maybe it was a lot? Maybe it was worth it?
It would need to be a truly enormous amount. It's sold really badly. We are talking being beaten on "the best month ever for hardware and software sales" by Just Dance 2016.
I just hope after the exclusivity ends the PS4/PC base manage to make it sell enough to continue the franchise.
I don't see how it possibly could. Not after an entire year. 4 to 6 months? Maybe. But this time next year people will be more interested in buying the *New* 2016 Big November release, than picking up a copy of a game that's a year old, especially if it releases at full retail price.
We don't know how much of an incentive they were given for timed exclusivity. Maybe it was a lot? Maybe it was worth it?
It would need to be a truly enormous amount. It's sold really badly. We are talking being beaten on "the best month ever for hardware and software sales" by Just Dance 2016.
I just hope after the exclusivity ends the PS4/PC base manage to make it sell enough to continue the franchise.
I don't see how it possibly could. Not after an entire year. 4 to 6 months? Maybe. But this time next year people will be more interested in buying the *New* 2016 Big November release, than picking up a copy of a game that's a year old, especially if it releases at full retail price.
I kind of hope people aren't going to spite an excellent game just because of this. It doesn't deserve to fail like this, especially a ~200k copies level of failure (yes, it really did that badly).
Big DookieSmells great!Houston, TXRegistered Userregular
Honestly, even if after all platforms are released and it still doesn't do great sales-wise, I'm not too worried about it. It's still a super popular franchise, and RotTR was very well received critically. I'd be quite surprised if they didn't make another sequel.
Much worse selling (and not as good) games have gotten sequels in the past. Tomb Raider will be fine.
I don't think that would be an example of someone not choosing Tomb Raider out of spite. I just think that this time next year, there's probably going to be a new game that people are going to be more hyped about and ready to buy, because November is the month for such games and when faced with buying the brand new shiny thing, or buying a game that's already a year old more people will end up buying the new one.
Square-Enix is practically going to have to give Tomb Raider away next year if they want it to be able to compete with brand new November releases.
Honestly, even if after all platforms are released and it still doesn't do great sales-wise, I'm not too worried about it. It's still a super popular franchise, and RotTR was very well received critically. I'd be quite surprised if they didn't make another sequel.
Much worse selling (and not as good) games have gotten sequels in the past. Tomb Raider will be fine.
Everything being relative, it doesn't seem like Square-Enix is going to be happy with anything in the series since the reboot (an irony, given how much people have gushed over it--I actually liked Legends and Underworld, and find the reboots remind me too much of Uncharted, but I still think they're damn good). It doesn't exactly seem like their MO, but what we're seeing seems to suggest that they really, really don't like putting up with it. There's not much (or any) indication that Crystal Dynamics could have kept pursuing a sequel if Microsoft hadn't bankrolled the cost, which is not something they're going to do for free. Sony wasn't doing it. It's not going to end up on a Nintendo platform. That kind of limits who else might come to its rescue from development hell.
Apparently the 2013 title sold better on the PS3 than on the Xbox 360. That's a bad sign, considering in 2013 1) the 360's larger install base worldwide and 2) the series as a whole is heavily, though not entirely, marketed in the US--thus, it major audience is the local market where there are twice as many Xbox 360s as PS3s (according to Polygon anyway). Given what I remember in 2013, it could be that people wanted their Uncharted fix without Nathan Drake (or maybe just an alternative), and there were other higher profile titles on the Xbox 360 to compete with (at least to the point where the PS3's scene was less competitive that particular season).
It seems like the choice was between "a game that's a timed exclusive in return for the monetary backing to make it happen" or "no game at all thanks to no backing". It's not really a secret that Microsoft expressed substantially more interest in Underworld and Legends than Sony did (they got some awesome exclusive DLC to the Xbox 360, which isn't available on PC, for Underworld). Maybe Sony was more interested in studios it had a good interplay with? I'm not saying Crystal Dynamics is Mojang, but Sony has a lot of developers in their corner, why would they approach another one, especially after Square-Enix made it clear they intended to hang them out to dry?
In 2014, I was surprised we were getting a sequel to the Tomb Raider at all. I'm still a little surprised. Square-Enix don't give a shit. Putting it out amid Fallout 4 was not a good idea, but the alternative was...wait out the two-month period where a crapload of major AAA releases were all coming out? That puts you toward missing the holiday rush. Delay it a year? Honestly, I wouldn't have minded, but I imagine moving all the release dates back uniformly (since MS was still paying the bills here) would have its own repercussions.
I think the outrage that forced them to say "its only 1 year" also played a role in this outcome for the release too. That uncertainty of when/if will it come would have helped, especially given the matchups that it has to compete against.
I also wonder how many people banging the fail drum actually bought it in lieu of opting to wait for it to release on PC/PS4, wait for it to go on sale, etc. I mean, that choice also played a role in the outcome, but eh.
“I used to draw, hard to admit that I used to draw...”
I think the outrage that forced them to say "its only 1 year" also played a role in this outcome for the release too. That uncertainty of when/if will it come would have helped, especially given the matchups that it has to compete against.
I also wonder how many people banging the fail drum actually bought it in lieu of opting to wait for it to release on PC/PS4, wait for it to go on sale, etc. I mean, that choice also played a role in the outcome, but eh.
Yeah, can you imagine the shitstorm that would have been if Microsoft bought the IP outright? I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the Xbox division didn't just go, "NO. DO NOT DO THIS. WE DO NOT WANT TO DEAL WITH THIS SHIT RIGHT NOW, OKAY? GIVE THEM THE ABSOLUTE MINIMUM THEY NEED TO FINISH THE GAME, MAKE IT NOT SUCK, AND GET A LIMITED EXCLUSIVITY DEAL." Assuming that were ever on the table (again, I doubt S-E gave a shit, but I bet Crystal Dynamics would have wanted some say in it too). I doubt Microsoft needed much convincing that it would be a headache they didn't want to contend with. Ensuring Square-Enix doesn't kill a game series because it fails to sell five million units isn't their responsibility, I'm pretty sure.
Of course, if the doom and gloom resume, that might have been the only opportunity for full sequel to Rise of the Tomb Raider.
0
surrealitychecklonely, but not unloveddreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered Userregular
i suspect the ps4 + pc sales will dominate the bone sales, but it is uncertain if the publisher will be willing to bank on that
we shall see
but unlike bloodborne or something like bayonetta i wouldnt buy a console for a zoom raider game, and i am more of a fan than ur average boner
i suspect the ps4 + pc sales will dominate the bone sales, but it is uncertain if the publisher will be willing to bank on that
Well, the alternative is Battlefront i.e. "Uh, so the PS4 population is more than the Xbox One and PC combined....! HURRAY!"
*in tiny voice* "Also the Xbox One population is twice the size of the PC population."
Which I'm pretty sure, no matter how you spin it is, is a fucking disaster for a multiplayer first person shooter release on PC. For a singleplayer experience, that translates to pretty bad sales...
Honestly, even if after all platforms are released and it still doesn't do great sales-wise, I'm not too worried about it. It's still a super popular franchise, and RotTR was very well received critically.
Honestly, even if after all platforms are released and it still doesn't do great sales-wise, I'm not too worried about it. It's still a super popular franchise, and RotTR was very well received critically.
You're talking about Square-Enix.
Abandon reason.
Which is why I'm glad Microsoft got this game made at all. Especially since, in my opinion, it's a significant improvement over the first one (a lot less Uncharted, a lot more Tomb Raider).
0
Big DookieSmells great!Houston, TXRegistered Userregular
Honestly, even if after all platforms are released and it still doesn't do great sales-wise, I'm not too worried about it. It's still a super popular franchise, and RotTR was very well received critically.
You're talking about Square-Enix.
Abandon reason.
Okay look man, that's... well, that's a fair point actually.
Dr. ChaosPost nuclear nuisanceRegistered Userregular
edited December 2015
Not surprised at all that sales are bad.
Releasing it in the midst of Call of Duty and Fallout 4 was pretty insane. And exclusivity to xbox one for a game series that probably traditionally has a pretty big playstation following, you would think they were sending it out to die.
Hope the money was worth it. In any case, looking forward to the PC launch.
The saddest thing is when you realize it wasn't just beaten by Just Dance
It was beaten by a Just Dance which had its highest selling version on the original Wii
Despite this being the best-selling software month for current gen consoles
I mean... couldn't Tomb Raider be 11th (or somewhere like that)? And be fine on digital sales? People are being like "OH SHIT, you got beat by Just Dance?" Uh yeah, that evergreen extremely high selling series? That's like saying "HA ha, Halo 5 FLOPPED, it got beat by Call of Duty!" Halo has always and forever been beaten by Call of Duty.
Being beaten by a game that sells the bulk of its sales on the original Wii is bad
No matter how you slice it
The NPD is an all console list right? So the listing for Just Dance includes all SKUs. Now if there's a just XB1 list and it didn't chart there, that I didn't hear about.
Being beaten by a game that sells the bulk of its sales on the original Wii is bad
No matter how you slice it
I mean, this is like saying that fancy microroast ultrapremium coffee only available to-order in a single shop that takes two hours to properly brew and appreciate is "worse" and "being beaten" by Folgers. One is ubiquitous. The other is not.
Also, the orderly part of me really dislikes "top sales" charts that don't bother to separate out by amount of platforms. Meaningless without a more granular statistical breakdown, since even the most popular platform exclusives (Uncharted, Halo, Mario anything) will look like crap compared to the multiplatform releases. "The Mario franchise is doomed! It sold less than COD!!!" is an absolute crock, for instance.
+3
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
The saddest thing is when you realize it wasn't just beaten by Just Dance
It was beaten by a Just Dance which had its highest selling version on the original Wii
Despite this being the best-selling software month for current gen consoles
I mean... couldn't Tomb Raider be 11th (or somewhere like that)? And be fine on digital sales? People are being like "OH SHIT, you got beat by Just Dance?" Uh yeah, that evergreen extremely high selling series? That's like saying "HA ha, Halo 5 FLOPPED, it got beat by Call of Duty!" Halo has always and forever been beaten by Call of Duty.
We know that Tomb Raider is less than 200k sales and only 73k in Europe. This is compared with 630k (NPD) and 300ishk in Europe for the first game (and that was only one weekend counted too).
And Halo Guardians has sold much worse than other games in the series, but done very well overall to get where it did on NPD.
Just Dance is at the bottom with 300k or something, primarily on the Wii. Being outsold by it IS a dreadful result.
And no, every indication is digital sales aren't saving it. Thereis no massive base of people buying only physical copies of Battlefront (near 2 million copies sold), Call of Duty and so on, while buying Tomb Raider digitally.
Original reboot got to 1.5 million easily in hardly any time, while the new game has barely limped to 500k (thought to be LESS) in far more time.
People have accused me of being hyperbolic, but anyone who follows Square or even Japanese publishers in general (eg Konami) should realize ridiculous unfair sales expectations are a thing. If Rise nearly didn't get made while the first game sold 8.5 million in the end, what hope is there of ever seeing a third game when this game has failed this dramatically?
At the very least, we are seeing the death of exclusive games for moving consoles. The xbone sold 1.3 million consoles and outsold the PS4 on one game: Call of Duty. So I think exclusive deals for multi platform games like this aren't going to be a thing anymore, but too late to save Tomb Raider I feel
Edit: Also multiplat games are killing it. Even removing stuff not on Xbone, you'd still have Rise languishing down an Xbone only list after multi-plat games and Halo. It's bad no matter how you try to spin it sadly.
BRIAN BLESSEDMaybe you aren't SPEAKING LOUDLY ENOUGHHHRegistered Userregular
edited December 2015
I don't think it matters because either way with the line-up they would have been damned if they did and damned if they didn't. If you want to have a whinge about them going up against Fallout 4 in the same period, imagine that over the course of three platforms simultaneously. RotTR would get slaughtered in sales with absolutely no way to bring it back save for the Steam sales (especially on the PC). It would have been the same situation on the Xbox One regardless of exclusivity.
The March release for the PC feels especially strategic, since it's a decent period where people are still buying into big AAA releases (big single-player titles like Mass Effect have done the same in the past) but it's not the holiday period. Likewise, not releasing RotTR on the same month as Uncharted 4 (the closest thing to a direct competitor) puts it out of direct competition, so I think the scheduling is actually pretty smart. Whatever you people think of the sales figures, I think Square Enix have put in the most optimal dates that they could, while still scoring a financial safety net. This second part is particularly important, because it means financial security for the series - a security that usually ensures costs are covered for things like marketing, financial security that ensures sequels.
And again, this was one of those games that people were wondering would ever come out at all. A first party funding it was probably inevitable, and given Sony's behaviour so far with their funding if they were given the opportunity I doubt we'd ever see it on the Xbox platform. If you want to hear about real spite, fucking third party games and content being withheld from other consoles for actual periods of forever just because is where it's really gross.
Does anyone have any actual, solid information on the extent of Microsoft's involvement with the game's funding? Everyone seems to be trying to paint a Street Fighter V scenario, where the game literally wouldn't exist without someone else coming in, yet Sony/Capcom were fairly upfront about that fact and I haven't heard it from Squeenix/Microsoft in any way except speculation.
Does anyone have any actual, solid information on the extent of Microsoft's involvement with the game's funding? Everyone seems to be trying to paint a Street Fighter V scenario, where the game literally wouldn't exist without someone else coming in, yet Sony/Capcom were fairly upfront about that fact and I haven't heard it from Squeenix/Microsoft in any way except speculation.
Pre "jfc, its a timed exclusive chill out", this was stated:
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.
“Yes, Microsoft will be publishing Rise of the Tomb Raider on Xbox," Square Enix's statement read.
"Microsoft has always seen huge potential in Tomb Raider and they will get behind this game with more support across development, marketing and retail than ever before, which we believe will be a step in continuing to build the Tomb Raider franchise as one of the biggest in gaming.”
That in no way implies that the game would not exist without Microsoft, it just states they bought timed exclusivity.
The quote I posted is a statement that details the publically expressed extent of Microsoft's involvement. That's what he asked for. The lack of an interpetation of those words in my post was intentional.
That said, doesnt imply that they "only bought timed exclusivity either." He asked for a factual statement, I gave him one.
“I used to draw, hard to admit that I used to draw...”
Posts
It would need to be a truly enormous amount. It's sold really badly. We are talking being beaten on "the best month ever for hardware and software sales" by Just Dance 2016.
I just hope after the exclusivity ends the PS4/PC base manage to make it sell enough to continue the franchise.
Edit: <200k is going around.
And then in 2018 we got The Tomb Raider, 4th reboot of the series.
Well, this seems like a bit of an overreaction.
Just a tad.
Oculus: TheBigDookie | XBL: Dook | NNID: BigDookie
The Xbox 360 had fewer sales of Tomb Raider 2013 than the PS3 did
The Xbox One had fewer sales of the Definitive Edition than the PS4 did
The Xbox One has fewer hardware sales than the PS4 does
They launched the game on a platform that has had fewer sales of the franchise, fewer hardware sales than the competitor, and as a bonus they did this alongside the release of Fallout 4.
Here's hoping that the "early 2016" date for the PC version holds up.
The nerdrage would be too great if they did that though. Could you imagine how hard people would be whining if that was the situation and the sales were like this? :P
We had a good run
Steam ID XBL: JohnnyChopsocky PSN:Stud_Beefpile WiiU:JohnnyChopsocky
The Division, Warframe (XB1)
GT: Tanith 6227
A year may as well be a forever exclusive in video game time, so I doubt MS buying it and making it a true exclusive would have boosted sales at all. The game was a system seller for me, but I recognize that I'm a very niche case. I don't think sales of the game would be much, if at all, improved by locking it up on their system
You obviously don't follow Square that much, given Rise was apparently at risk of never being made in the first place (despite 8.5 million sales for the reboot).
I for one will be disappointed, but not surprised, if a third game is never made due to this.
Technically they did.
It failed to make it on the sales charts.
It's not really. This is November sales we're talking about. The same month as Black Friday/Cyber Monday. The month where people buy all of the things. Those would be poor sales numbers for an exclusive in any given month, but for November they are especially bad.
I don't see how it possibly could. Not after an entire year. 4 to 6 months? Maybe. But this time next year people will be more interested in buying the *New* 2016 Big November release, than picking up a copy of a game that's a year old, especially if it releases at full retail price.
It was beaten by a Just Dance which had its highest selling version on the original Wii
Despite this being the best-selling software month for current gen consoles
I kind of hope people aren't going to spite an excellent game just because of this. It doesn't deserve to fail like this, especially a ~200k copies level of failure (yes, it really did that badly).
Much worse selling (and not as good) games have gotten sequels in the past. Tomb Raider will be fine.
Oculus: TheBigDookie | XBL: Dook | NNID: BigDookie
Square-Enix is practically going to have to give Tomb Raider away next year if they want it to be able to compete with brand new November releases.
There will simply be other hot new games next fall, and it's likely to be overlooked because it's not new
Everything being relative, it doesn't seem like Square-Enix is going to be happy with anything in the series since the reboot (an irony, given how much people have gushed over it--I actually liked Legends and Underworld, and find the reboots remind me too much of Uncharted, but I still think they're damn good). It doesn't exactly seem like their MO, but what we're seeing seems to suggest that they really, really don't like putting up with it. There's not much (or any) indication that Crystal Dynamics could have kept pursuing a sequel if Microsoft hadn't bankrolled the cost, which is not something they're going to do for free. Sony wasn't doing it. It's not going to end up on a Nintendo platform. That kind of limits who else might come to its rescue from development hell.
Apparently the 2013 title sold better on the PS3 than on the Xbox 360. That's a bad sign, considering in 2013 1) the 360's larger install base worldwide and 2) the series as a whole is heavily, though not entirely, marketed in the US--thus, it major audience is the local market where there are twice as many Xbox 360s as PS3s (according to Polygon anyway). Given what I remember in 2013, it could be that people wanted their Uncharted fix without Nathan Drake (or maybe just an alternative), and there were other higher profile titles on the Xbox 360 to compete with (at least to the point where the PS3's scene was less competitive that particular season).
It seems like the choice was between "a game that's a timed exclusive in return for the monetary backing to make it happen" or "no game at all thanks to no backing". It's not really a secret that Microsoft expressed substantially more interest in Underworld and Legends than Sony did (they got some awesome exclusive DLC to the Xbox 360, which isn't available on PC, for Underworld). Maybe Sony was more interested in studios it had a good interplay with? I'm not saying Crystal Dynamics is Mojang, but Sony has a lot of developers in their corner, why would they approach another one, especially after Square-Enix made it clear they intended to hang them out to dry?
In 2014, I was surprised we were getting a sequel to the Tomb Raider at all. I'm still a little surprised. Square-Enix don't give a shit. Putting it out amid Fallout 4 was not a good idea, but the alternative was...wait out the two-month period where a crapload of major AAA releases were all coming out? That puts you toward missing the holiday rush. Delay it a year? Honestly, I wouldn't have minded, but I imagine moving all the release dates back uniformly (since MS was still paying the bills here) would have its own repercussions.
I also wonder how many people banging the fail drum actually bought it in lieu of opting to wait for it to release on PC/PS4, wait for it to go on sale, etc. I mean, that choice also played a role in the outcome, but eh.
Yeah, can you imagine the shitstorm that would have been if Microsoft bought the IP outright? I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the Xbox division didn't just go, "NO. DO NOT DO THIS. WE DO NOT WANT TO DEAL WITH THIS SHIT RIGHT NOW, OKAY? GIVE THEM THE ABSOLUTE MINIMUM THEY NEED TO FINISH THE GAME, MAKE IT NOT SUCK, AND GET A LIMITED EXCLUSIVITY DEAL." Assuming that were ever on the table (again, I doubt S-E gave a shit, but I bet Crystal Dynamics would have wanted some say in it too). I doubt Microsoft needed much convincing that it would be a headache they didn't want to contend with. Ensuring Square-Enix doesn't kill a game series because it fails to sell five million units isn't their responsibility, I'm pretty sure.
Of course, if the doom and gloom resume, that might have been the only opportunity for full sequel to Rise of the Tomb Raider.
we shall see
but unlike bloodborne or something like bayonetta i wouldnt buy a console for a zoom raider game, and i am more of a fan than ur average boner
Well, the alternative is Battlefront i.e. "Uh, so the PS4 population is more than the Xbox One and PC combined....! HURRAY!"
*in tiny voice* "Also the Xbox One population is twice the size of the PC population."
Which I'm pretty sure, no matter how you spin it is, is a fucking disaster for a multiplayer first person shooter release on PC. For a singleplayer experience, that translates to pretty bad sales...
You're talking about Square-Enix.
Abandon reason.
Which is why I'm glad Microsoft got this game made at all. Especially since, in my opinion, it's a significant improvement over the first one (a lot less Uncharted, a lot more Tomb Raider).
Okay look man, that's... well, that's a fair point actually.
Oculus: TheBigDookie | XBL: Dook | NNID: BigDookie
I'll get around to it once it hits PC.
3DS Friend Code: 2165-6448-8348 www.Twitch.TV/cooljammer00
Battle.Net: JohnDarc#1203 Origin/UPlay: CoolJammer00
Releasing it in the midst of Call of Duty and Fallout 4 was pretty insane. And exclusivity to xbox one for a game series that probably traditionally has a pretty big playstation following, you would think they were sending it out to die.
Hope the money was worth it. In any case, looking forward to the PC launch.
I mean... couldn't Tomb Raider be 11th (or somewhere like that)? And be fine on digital sales? People are being like "OH SHIT, you got beat by Just Dance?" Uh yeah, that evergreen extremely high selling series? That's like saying "HA ha, Halo 5 FLOPPED, it got beat by Call of Duty!" Halo has always and forever been beaten by Call of Duty.
No matter how you slice it
The NPD is an all console list right? So the listing for Just Dance includes all SKUs. Now if there's a just XB1 list and it didn't chart there, that I didn't hear about.
I mean, this is like saying that fancy microroast ultrapremium coffee only available to-order in a single shop that takes two hours to properly brew and appreciate is "worse" and "being beaten" by Folgers. One is ubiquitous. The other is not.
Also, the orderly part of me really dislikes "top sales" charts that don't bother to separate out by amount of platforms. Meaningless without a more granular statistical breakdown, since even the most popular platform exclusives (Uncharted, Halo, Mario anything) will look like crap compared to the multiplatform releases. "The Mario franchise is doomed! It sold less than COD!!!" is an absolute crock, for instance.
We know that Tomb Raider is less than 200k sales and only 73k in Europe. This is compared with 630k (NPD) and 300ishk in Europe for the first game (and that was only one weekend counted too).
And Halo Guardians has sold much worse than other games in the series, but done very well overall to get where it did on NPD.
Just Dance is at the bottom with 300k or something, primarily on the Wii. Being outsold by it IS a dreadful result.
And no, every indication is digital sales aren't saving it. Thereis no massive base of people buying only physical copies of Battlefront (near 2 million copies sold), Call of Duty and so on, while buying Tomb Raider digitally.
Original reboot got to 1.5 million easily in hardly any time, while the new game has barely limped to 500k (thought to be LESS) in far more time.
People have accused me of being hyperbolic, but anyone who follows Square or even Japanese publishers in general (eg Konami) should realize ridiculous unfair sales expectations are a thing. If Rise nearly didn't get made while the first game sold 8.5 million in the end, what hope is there of ever seeing a third game when this game has failed this dramatically?
At the very least, we are seeing the death of exclusive games for moving consoles. The xbone sold 1.3 million consoles and outsold the PS4 on one game: Call of Duty. So I think exclusive deals for multi platform games like this aren't going to be a thing anymore, but too late to save Tomb Raider I feel
Edit: Also multiplat games are killing it. Even removing stuff not on Xbone, you'd still have Rise languishing down an Xbone only list after multi-plat games and Halo. It's bad no matter how you try to spin it sadly.
The March release for the PC feels especially strategic, since it's a decent period where people are still buying into big AAA releases (big single-player titles like Mass Effect have done the same in the past) but it's not the holiday period. Likewise, not releasing RotTR on the same month as Uncharted 4 (the closest thing to a direct competitor) puts it out of direct competition, so I think the scheduling is actually pretty smart. Whatever you people think of the sales figures, I think Square Enix have put in the most optimal dates that they could, while still scoring a financial safety net. This second part is particularly important, because it means financial security for the series - a security that usually ensures costs are covered for things like marketing, financial security that ensures sequels.
And again, this was one of those games that people were wondering would ever come out at all. A first party funding it was probably inevitable, and given Sony's behaviour so far with their funding if they were given the opportunity I doubt we'd ever see it on the Xbox platform. If you want to hear about real spite, fucking third party games and content being withheld from other consoles for actual periods of forever just because is where it's really gross.
Pre "jfc, its a timed exclusive chill out", this was stated:
Source
The quote I posted is a statement that details the publically expressed extent of Microsoft's involvement. That's what he asked for. The lack of an interpetation of those words in my post was intentional.
That said, doesnt imply that they "only bought timed exclusivity either." He asked for a factual statement, I gave him one.