Crystal Dynamics posts Tomb Raider non-exclusivity FAQ...on Tumblr

I think most of us knew as soon as it was announced that Rise of the Tomb Raider wasn't going to be truly exclusive to the Xbox One, but this just gets better and better. Yesterday, on Tumblr of all places, Crystal Dynamics / Square Enix released a short FAQ to address the backlash they've been getting on the internet since Gamescom about their upcoming Tomb Raider sequel. On Tumblr. Yes...Tumblr.

This isn't going to affect my stance on the game at all, I'm still looking forward to the PC version in hopes that it's just as good or better than the last game. I just find it fascinated to watch these kinds of announcements backfire when rabid fans freak out about games possibly not coming to their favorite platforms.

Here's the text from the Tumblr post:

Rise of the Tomb Raider FAQ

Thank you for sending us your comments and questions. We looked through the posts on several channels and collected the questions you asked the most into the following FAQ.

1. What does exclusive to Xbox mean?
   It means that Rise of the Tomb Raider is coming Holiday 2015 exclusively on Xbox One and Xbox 360.
2. Does the exclusive to Xbox have a duration? Is it timed? How long is the duration? Can we expect a PlayStation 4 or PC release in the future?
   Yes, our deal with Microsoft has a duration. We aren’t discussing details of the deal, and are focused on delivering a great game on Xbox One and Xbox 360.
3. Did Crystal Dynamics know about this deal?
   Yes, Crystal Dynamics is excited to be partnering with Microsoft to make the best game possible. As Darrell mentioned in his message, we have a long history with Microsoft and they have been a very strong supporter of the franchise. They will help us grow and nurture the Tomb Raider franchise more than ever before.
4. Were the fans considered when making this decision? Are Crystal Dynamics and Square Enix aware of the franchise history with PlayStation and on PC?
   Of course. We did not make this decision lightly. Our goal is to build the best game that we possibly can, and our relationship with Microsoft will help us realize our vision for the game.
5. Why didn’t Microsoft, Square Enix or Crystal Dynamics say upfront it was a timed exclusive? Why all the indirect language?
   We certainly didn’t intend to cause any confusion with the announcement. The Microsoft Gamescom stage was a great place to make the initial announcement, but not necessarily to go into details.

I was gonna go and read the comments but then I remembered I'm not a total idiot.

6. But, why???

$$$$, that's why.

As a non-Xbox One owner who can be patient to wait for a PC version, this continues to be good news for me.

This is all so goddamn dumb. This right here is one of the biggest problems with the games industry, or at least with Microsoft.. All this fucking double speak..
"We got paid lots and lots of money to tell you what a great xbox experience this game is going to be for xbox one and xbox 360 on the xbox platform for microsoft's xbox division... At least until it comes out on PS4 and PC and looks, plays and feels exactly the fucking same."
No-one is fooled by this. Yet they still do it anyway? Who the fuck gains from any of this nonsense?

I loved the first one, thought it was way better than anything Uncharted ever offered, and even though I'll be picking up a PS4 next month I'm still excited. Like usual the game industry is following the idiotic cycle of no games for 3 months and then a shitload of triple A titles releasing all within weeks of each other. Even when money isn't the issue who is going to buy all those games new? Dragon Age will probably eat up an entire month of my time before I get around to playing the other cool releases and by then I'm not going to be as anxious and I'll start looking around for bargains rather than getting them new.

So hey, if this means that Tomb Raider is going to come out during one of those idiotic dry spells then I'm all for it.

That's what I'm most interested in regarding this whole dumb mess. Here's the awkward way things might play out:

The game is released, gets some critical acclaim (maybe not as much as the first as that was a big departure and this will probably be good but definitely less impactful), but maybe doesn't sell nearly as well as Square wants because we've seen their unreasonable sales expectations before, now coupled with the game exclusively launching for months at least on the console that fewer gamers own this generation. That would push them to start a discount earlier than some games to keep copies moving, but then the PS4 and PC release are looming, so they can't discount those as they're still "new releases". But as you said, by that time media coverage will have moved on and players won't have that day 1 itch, so they'll probably wait just a bit longer for a discount anyway. So all involved (except MS possibly) have lost money, and Crystal Dynamics have at least lost a lot of face with fans from this dumb maneuver.

It could play out totally differently, of course, but in general, I just don't see "timed exclusives" working out well for a dev in the end. EA built their modern empire on making sure that all of their big games release on every device a person could possibly own from next gen consoles to shitty phone clones. Finding success from cutting out half your audience just don't make no sense.

Though people keep saying it isn't a system-seller, I'll probably still buy an Xbox to play it next year (though it's more of a final thing to push me over).

Indeed

I mean, they wouldn't do it for nothing. This is getting them a huge chunk of cash from Microsoft. Read between the lines and that's all they're saying.

This FAQ showed me that Rise of the Tomb Raider is coming out on old consoles which I didn't know about. (I have zero interest in the series, but I assumed it was going to be current gen only)

I wonder if releasing a last gen version too is another consequence of this exclusivity deal, because of the XB1's tiny install base. Otherwise, why bother? Last gen sales have died and the next gen versions of new games(especially on ps4) have been outselling the last gen versions in NPD's every month.

So much surrounding this game seems like a bummer.

I just don't see it doing well when coming out at the same time as Uncharted 4, critically or sales wise.

Agreed

It makes sense to make the game available to as many people as possible, though. There are still far more Xbox 360's and PS3's out there than Xbox One's or PS4's, and this will continue to be true for a long time to come. If there was a good chance that the last-gen versions wouldn't make any money, then Square Enix wouldn't be making it.

If development cost of a port is less than the projected revenue from the port's sales, then it makes sense to do it. This will probably continue for quite some time, look how long multiplatform games were still released for the Xbox and PS2 during the beginning of the last console generation.

The allighty ollar

$$$$ is the reason investors gave the studio $$$$ in order to build this game.

$$$$ is also the reason the developers show up for work in the morning instead of staying home and talking shit on Twitter all day.

Where was this outrage when Splinter Cell: Conviction was an Xbox/Windows exclusive? Oh that's right, I forgot last generation, Sony was playing the heel role in our stupid games culture, so therefore it was ha ha Sony, take that.

I wish I could say the same. They're about as video game fanboy dumb as you'd expect them to be. Which, I have to say, is impressively dumb.

Partially that, partially because Splinter Cell always looked better on Xbox and partially because people were too outraged about them making the gameplay actually fun to pay attention to that.

Haha, why Tumblr of all things? Even Reddit would have been a better place to post something like this.

Most of the people in those huge install bases aren't actively buying new games though. Going by NPD's and also some of Ubisoft's financial reports, which showed that 75% of Watch Dogs sales were on next gen, It just doesn't seem worth it to keep making these last gen ports. And these low numbers for last gen are for games from within 6 months of launch of the new consoles. It's gonna be even lower by the time this next Tomb Raider comes out in late 2015. Doesn't seem like a smart move.

Maybe. We'll see. We also don't know how difficult or expensive it was to make the game for the last-gen consoles as well as the current ones, so it's all moot really. It could have cost Squeenix next to nothing for all we know.

The existence of last gen versions is the only thing that bums me out whatsoever and even then it's like a 2% rate.

Also, the name.

It either cost Square or Microsoft a significant amount of money or the current versions will just look like a scaled up last gen game. Downscaling and maximizing the performance budget does cost money.

I don't think anyone ever claimed that ports don't cost money, it's the relative cost compared to projected sales that is under discussion here...two figures which we have no clue about.

This seems unnecessary. I thought it was already cleared up that it was a timed exclusive? The only point here that was nice of them to make was to apologize for the confusion, but that could've been done in a statement. It should've been done when they clarified that it was a timed exclusive, if it wasn't.

In any case, I'm still looking forward to see where they take it. The first was a fun game, and all the story beats were nothing special. Hopefully they'll have built on the Uncharted-with-a-bow-and-icepick combat and will actually tell a good story. The reveal trailer gives me a little hope for the latter at least.

Posting it to Tumblr is weird though, yeah.

@joshwent: IT certainly doesn't. I never saw the benefit of exclusives apart from a one time check. Gears of War sold really well, but certainly it would have sold even better were it to come out on PS3 as well. Same goes for Uncharted, or Last of Us. The one upside to this that I can see is that Ubisoft will get to have it's cake and eat it too. On one hand they get the financial boost and extended promo's provided by Microsoft - on the other hand they still get to enjoy the financial benefits of a multi-platform presence down the road. Even though people might buy their game at a discount, they will still have profits trickling in from both platforms as opposed to one. Honestly if we could substitute all exclusives for timed exclusives the world would be a better place. Let Playstation owners have their go at Uncharted 4 first, but bring it over to the XB1 down the road - what do you gain from locking your game up on one console forever? Sales will dwindle eventually and a second release on another console will provide a nice little boost in sales that were only going to go down.

@humanity: Well, more accurately, what do third parties gain by having their games be exclusive? There's a good reason why Sony wants Uncharted and the Last of Us permanently exclusive on Playstation consoles. There's a good reason why Microsoft wants the Gears of War and Halo franchises to be Xbox brands.

Is Bloodbourne a PS4 exclusive?

Crystal Dynamics (and specifically Tomb Raider) have a really great Tumblr where they show off fans creations - only a matter of time before more important things started appearing there.

They screwed up this announcement though - a little more clarity would have gone a long way (and I wonder if now is just too late - as people stopped paying attention: and will inevitably see Ads with Xbox logos on next year and just think they were given complete exclusivity).

@brodehouse: Yeah, bloodborne is. Sony is helping out with dev on it and will probably publish it, at least in japan, but I imagine in every other part of the world they can considering how much money they left on the table by letting atlus and namco publish demon's souls in north america and europe.

Sony will probably retain the rights to the IP as well, again like with demon's souls.

Yes it is. For now anyway. Seeing as Demon's Souls never made it over to any other platform it's a good bet that it will stay a PS4 exclusive.

First party exclusives lose out on the sales as well. I would be interested to see some statistics for the amount of game sales they lose by being only on PS4 compared to the amount of PS4 purchases they get in exchange.

CD and SE are just using this supposed controversy to spread the word about the game- interestingly making this supposed controversy even bigger. It's a typical marketing ploy.There's no real controversy with it because the wording already indicated it was a timed exclusive.

Some people (probably mostly kids if I had to guess) just don't know reading comprehension. It's a real problem these days.

The one good thing that came out of this was the conversations I had on Gamespot with people freaking out. I enjoyed letting them know they were freaking out over nothing. Not that I could get to everybody- there's too many idiots in the world- but I could get to a few. Best conversations I've ever had on Gamespot actually. That should be a job- just speaking one on one with commenters who are completely misunderstanding a gaming news article. I'm pretty good at it.

I am long past the age or perhaps the frame of mind where I need to play a game day and date. It's coming to the PC eventually, so I can wait until then. Truth be told, even after that I'll probably wait until it's on sale. I really believe this brouhaha has less to do with exclusivity and more about beating up on Microsoft. Don't get me wrong, flay them when it's justified. This however is just a common business practice that we should all be used to.

I wonder how wide an audience companies think these kinds of messages reach. Smart people work at these places and they must know that the most direct audience receiving these messages are not fooled by, and have nothing but derision for, the type of wording displayed above.

Is it just a situation where we both know whats really going on but we have to live in this Japanese style world of fake politeness because that's how its always been? I guess the reason must simply be that the more specific their statements get, the more specific and insistent internet complaints will be. Maybe its easier to be vague so that our disgruntled response doesn't grow to be unmanageable. I don't know.

Answer to number 5 is why I am so tired of internet comments.

"OMG NO IMMEDIATE INJECTION OF TRUTH BEAMS INTO MY VEINS? FUCK ALL BUSINESSES."

They respond in a measured, clear way and people are getting angry over them clarifying things. Jeez. Give it a rest people, it's a damn video game.

And seriously, this has been happening for freaking generations. Why are people suddenly upset? It's ridiculous. Exclusives have been a driving factor in the industry since hte beginning of time. This is just another case of people wanting a chance to start shit against MS.

I continue to not care about this. Well, ok I do in the fact that I enjoyed the first Tomb Raider and am looking forward to this game. The outrage though...stop it.

@brodehouse:

A reoccuring theme to "Modern AAA Development" is spending too much money on iffy titles. I'm not saying that another Tomb Raider game is "iffy" but the last game was over budget for the market.

If CD and Square-Enix couldn't have made this game without Microsoft extra money then this is a good thing in a short term but not so great in the long run. We as gamers get a game but the cost is that the inflating the production cost where the saner move would have been reducing the scope and risk and distributing the software on as many platforms as possible. In other words I'm not a fan of fixing skyrocketing AAA game budgets by finding more funding from console vendors because it doesn't seem to help in either quality or quantity.

It's almost as if the world has never seen an exclusive or timed-exclusive title before.

Also, for fuck's sake, if you want people to take your company seriously, don't fucking post your shit on tumblr. I mean, come on.

I think saying last gen will most definitely sell more copies because it has a bigger install base is a slightly broken idea. It is possible for it to sell a lot more, but it isn't a guarantee. People who have purchased new consoles at this point in the game are people dedicated to buying video games. These aren't the people who buy games once or twice a year, they're the people who clamor for good games whenever they come out.

I'm curious as to what the budget for this new game is compared to the previous. In theory, some cost-saving could be involved since the engine and tech for Rise of the Tomb Raider could largely be recycled from Tomb Raider.

I don't think you could be more condescending even if you tried. The likes of aaron greenburg and other Microsoft mouthpieces on top of multiple insides sources misled people after the announcement saying it was a permanent exclusive. Their initial clarification was: "permanent exclusive".

I just read the thread over again and I didn't see anyone saying that last gen would sell more copies than current gen due to install base...did this come up in another topic or something?

I love that they're still using the phrase "Rise of the Tomb Raider is coming Holiday 2015 exclusively on Xbox One and Xbox 360." There are definitely two ways to interpret that line and this whole mess could have been prevented by saying that the game is coming Holiday 2015 first on Xbox One and Xbox 360, with other platforms later. Then you still get your Xbox plug in there without everyone focusing on the "exclusive" part. Just horrible messaging all around.

@mb: Which is why I didn't quote/reply to anyone in particular. A few people (you included) were talking about cross generation game releases and sales potential, and it made me think of the argument that publishers are still making last gen versions of new games because they have larger install bases (so they have to sell more, right?). It probably is a good business strategy (in theory), but I think it's also a very short sighted one. It's like they have one foot in this generation and one foot in the last (or however that analogy goes).

I'm realizing now that my initial comment comes off as a bit off topic, so apologies for that.

Similar to the messaging we got from Sony about No Man's Sky at E3 this year. They said something like, "Coming first to consoles on PlayStation 4!" Right away people were misinterpreting that statement and calling No Man's Sky a "PlayStation exclusive"...when it clearly wasn't, and that wasn't even that was said.

Not really the same thing. Only an idiot would misconstrue what sony said. On the other hand MS had PR reps on twitter correcting press saying RotTR was a timed exclusive right after the conference.

Obviously they can't say "hey, bro, just wait 6 months and buy it on your playstation or whatever", but they could at least try to not have their representatives actually lying about it when their vague pr speak made people upset. I also don't think CD helped any with their original tumblr post where they went "we love our playstation and PC fans, we wouldn't be where we are without them, and for those people we are proud to offer the sequel to the top down isometric game most of you didn't give a shit about last time". Reminded me a bit too much of the "we've got a console for those people" thing.

It really is amazing how every single thing MS PR touches turns to shit almost instantly, and then they just keep shoveling more shit on top of it for days or weeks after before correcting themselves.

I'm still amused by the fluff about wanting to make the game the best it possibly can be and that Microsoft will help them with that. If Crystal Dynamics really wanted the game to be the best it can be why is it not only developed for the less powerful Xbox One (not that big a deal) but also the 360?

Personally, the reason I'm disappointed with this whole thing is that I thought we had moved past major third party franchises like this getting exclusivity/timed exclusivity deals. On the bombcast Brad kept bringing up that it used to be a lot worse, but that's kind of exactly why I'm annoyed - I was glad to have left this shit behind. The messaging was a little muddied, but it seemed obvious enough that it was a limited period of exclusivity, that that has been confirmed doesn't make me feel any better about the fact the deal was struck in the first place, though.

All of this in spite of the fact I'll likely own an Xbox One by the time RotTR is released - I won't be buying it there, though.

Someone freaking out on twitter, someone replying to that person saying "it's a timed exclusive" and a PR rep working for Microsoft replies with "nope. Exclusive" isn't a little muddied, that's nothing but mud.

I said they two incidents were similar, not the same.

Games are expensive to make. It's a smart, prudent business move by Crystal Dynamics.

I certainly hope so. If the new one has a similarly long tail as the first maybe this can get squeenix off their backs about not selling 6 million copies in the first quarter and labeling a profitable game a failure for no reason.