While Rise of the Tomb Raider will make its way out to Xbox platforms later this year, and to the PlayStation 4 in “holiday 2016,” expect a third game to follow it up after that.
Speaking to GameSpot at gamescom, Square Enix Americas CEO Phil Rogers (accidentally) revealed that this iteration of Tomb Raider will be a trilogy. Rogers had the slip up when talking about the backlash for Rise of the Tomb Raider’s timed exclusivity deal with Microsoft.
We believe first and foremost this is the right thing to do with Tomb Raider right now…What it’s done for the sake of the studio and the next beat with the Tomb Raider trilogy… But the backlash is–we’ve watched carefully and we believe it’s the right thing to do.
Well, that’s not really surprising, no? Unless Rise of the Tomb Raider flops hard, it’s understandable that Square Enix would want a follow up to one of its biggest franchise.
In the same interview, Rogers answered whether fans should expect more exclusivity deals in the future, and whether Rise of the Tomb Raider’s timed exclusivity deal was a step in the franchise eventually being a full-on Xbox exclusive.
We’re very much a game-by-game, case-by-case company. I can’t rule it out…But as with any exclusivity, they’re really tough decisions.
We don’t see this over time becoming an Xbox IP…This is a story and we’ll look back over the Tomb Raider franchise and history, and it will be a chapter where it was a timed-exclusive with Xbox.
What do we think of all this timed exclusive stuff? Go read our latest edition of Now Loading below to see where each staff member stand on the situation.
[Source: GameSpot]
Now Loading...Rise of the Tomb Raider
-
Now Loading...Rise of the Tomb Raider PS4 Confirmed, What Do You Think of Obvious Timed Exclusives?
-
Alex Co
I've come to accept timed exclusives. Heck, I can even (sorta) stomach the waiting. But what I hate about all this is the silence and non-answers we get. Hey, video game PR, if you can't flatly say that X game is NEVER coming to a rival platform, or you're skirting the issue, we already know the answer to it.
Am I bummed that Rise of the Tomb Raider is a timed exclusive? Yes, a little bit, since I liked the Tomb Raider reboot quite a lot. However, I don't think I'm going to lose sleep over it since Uncharted 4 will be out in early 2016.
Not discounting Square Enix and Crystal Dynamics, but I'd like to think that Naughty Dog's upcoming adventure game will be quite better than Rise.
I get timed exclusivity deals are the norm now, but just be upfront about it. I know that platform makers don't want to say anything since they're trying to fool people into thinking that X game is only coming to their platform (and hence, they need to buy said platform to play it), but not admitting the truth just pisses people off.
-
Zarmena Khan
I think it would take some digging out of info and insider knowledge to understand how exclusivity deals work. We're only looking at one side of it, and from the outside, I must admit that they look incredibly silly, especially if we're talking about a title that has been multiplatform for as long as one can remember. All I see is a developer alienating a good chunk of its fan base, losing a huge chunk of its market, and losing its popularity, all of which will eventually translate into lost sales.
Is Tomb Raider a system seller? Doubt it.
With all of the above considered, it's hard to understand the benefit in such a move until and unless developers are receiving amounts of money that more than make up for any potential loss of sale or reputation damage. And this is where I think we'd need to know how many sack of gold coins they receive before we call any kind of exclusivity a stupid move. It could be a great business decision from their perspective. As gamers, we hate it. But the games industry doesn't solely thrive on appeasing gamers. -
Tyler Treese
I don't have any issues with it. At the end of the day this is a business, and competition only makes gaming better. I'll gladly play Rise of the Tomb Raider on Xbox One when it releases this year, and I'll probably check it out again on PlayStation 4 once it makes its way to Sony's console. As a gamer, I enjoy games. I don't really care about what consoles they are on, I just want the games to be the best that they can be.
Exclusivity, timed or not, can allow a publisher to make a better game, secure proper funding, or marketing support. Does it suck for someone who only has a PlayStation 4? Sure, but the same thing can be said for Xbox owners when Sony secures timed exclusives. It has happened, will continue to happen, and I'm glad it does. It makes for a healthy marketplace. -
Chandler Wood
Timed exclusives are just part of the business, even if they are a part that hurts gamers. Personally I think it harms the performance of a game as they fragment their audience, especially with a year-long deal like Tomb Raider's. Perhaps Microsoft was insecure with their own first-party lineup, thinking that nothing of theirs could go up against Uncharted 4, so they scooped up the one thing that even had a fraction of a chance of competing.
Eliciting competition is not a bad thing. Competition is what pushes and drives our industry to consistently do better, and without it, games grow stale. I'll probably check out Rise of the Tomb Raider PS4 in a year, but I'm thinking by that time it will be long overshadowed by other great PS4 games as the hype and attention for the game dies off quickly after this year's Xbox One release.
-
Dan Oravasaari
I think regardless of a title being an obvious timed exclusive, it will get people to at the very least talk about it and that is exactly what developers want. No matter how certain we can be about a product moving across platforms over time, there is always the sense of doubt that it will happen, and there will always be the question of when it will happen. Sadly, this of course will put some fans of the competing platform off, but if done right, it can be successful. The big issue is that gamers will be keeping a closer on the platform differences than normal, and that is something that usually never ends well.
-
Mark Labbe
My issue with timed exclusives is that by the time the delayed content reaches other consoles, it has already been streamed online a thousand times, and numerous articles and user reviews will have been written about it. At that point, I will have inevitably already read numerous things about the game, essentially ruining it for me. Even if I don't read anything about the game, it will be "old" already, at least in video game terms, and I'll be more likely to spend my money on a newer game.
-
Michael Briers
To call timed exclusives a necessary evil may border on naivety, but there have been instances when the deal in question benefits both parties, and Rise of the Tomb Raider really illustrates this mutually beneficial agreement. Crystal Dynamics' bold 2013 reboot may have been a hit amongst fans and critics, but Square Enix still deemed sales to be underwhelming, meaning that a partnership with Microsoft -- and therefore financial aid with marketing and production -- isn't too surprising. Both Square and Crystal are evidently playing the long game with their rebooted Tomb Raider, and let's face it, they'll need all the marketing they can muster if Rise of the Tomb Raider really is to compete with Fallout 4 on November 10.
-
Mack Ashworth
I think delaying an experience for other gamers is a pretty pathetic "business strategy." With that said, there are so many games out that I still need to play, that I don't mind waiting a little to play games like Rise of the Tomb Raider. I imagine many other gamers are also working their way through their backlogs and aren't too troubled by a game's delay.
