We've got a Sensei Ten Neon Rider Gaming Mouse and a Neon Rider QcK L Mousepad up for grabs!
SteelSeries Neon Rider Give Away!
The World Game is back, natch, so we go through all the big changes coming in EA’s FIFA 21.
FIFA 21 Preview - Inside the Big Gameplay Changes Coming
Grounded is a lot of fun - but like any backyard being put forth to the producers of Backyard Blitz, it needs some work.
Grounded - Early Access Impressions
Where the BenQ EW3280U immediately impresses is with its colour accuracy and vibrance, making it perfect for firing up 4K content.
BenQ EW3280U 32" 4K HDR Display Review
Timed Exclusives Might Be Good Business, Just Don’t Treat Us Like Fools
Post by Dan @ 03:05pm 29/08/14 | Comments
AusGamers explores why we don't think platform exclusive content is inherently bad, but the way its being presented by games publishers needs to be addressed.

Microsoft rubbed a few people the wrong way when it was announced at the recent GamesCom 2014 Xbox media briefing that the upcoming Rise of the Tomb Raider would be an Xbox exclusive. The news was significant because although the series technically debuted on SEGA Saturn and has been ever-present on PC over it’s 18 year history, much of Tomb Raider’s enduring popularity stemmed from its appearance on PlayStation platforms.

So for those enthusiasts that might currently only own a PlayStation console, Microsoft announcement can be effectively interpreted as ‘we paid Square Enix a bunch of money so you can’t play this without buying our device’.

Now, I’m going to go against the knee jerk opinion here and say that it’s an understandable and acceptable business practice if a platform holder wants to throw down some big bucks to tether big potential titles to its stable. From the end-user’s perspective, the result is not a whole lot different to the concept of first party titles -- games developed by studio’s wholly owned by the console manufacture that are inherently platform exclusive.

Similarly, recent so-called second party titles -- entirely platform exclusive titles developed by third party studios such as Sunset Overdrive and Ryse -- don’t seem to have drawn the same games community ire as the Tomb Raider decision, so the issue here seems to be simply because its an established franchise that had cultivated an expectation of platform agnosticism.



Tomb Raider publisher Square Enix wouldn’t have pledged the game to Microsoft’s console if it didn’t think it was in its best financial interests, and it’s difficult to speculate how much cash might have changed hands in the deal, but it has obviously concluded that the benefits of the deal outweigh potential lost sales from delaying the game’s launch on Xbox’s competitors.

Tomb Raider is a well known brand, but it’s quality has waxed and waned over the history of its nine or so adventures, so even after the critical acclaim and commercial success of the 2013 reboot, Rise of the Tomb Raider will still have to work hard to prove and promote itself if it wants to continue elevating the franchise to the level of other publisher’s money printers like Super Mario or Assassin’s Creed.

By allowing Xbox consoles an exclusivity window on the game, Square Enix gains a significant marketing partner in Microsoft. If current dates are met, Rise of the Tomb Raider will be launching in the same market as Sony’s next Uncharted title, a very similar type of game (in a series very likely inspired by Lara’s adventures) from a developer known for its unrelenting quality, coming off the back of the smash hit The Last of Us.

It’s quite clear that Microsoft will be making a big contribution to the new game’s marketing effort, we might even see Tomb Raider console bundles or other cross promotion type things as a result, and when framed like this it makes sense that the deal surely has a net benefit for Square Enix beyond just money changing hands between the companies.

So the issue then isn’t that this practice is occurring, but rather how it’s being conducted. During Sony’s GamesCom presentations the likes of Destiny, No Man’s Sky, The Vanishing of Ethan Carter were all being promoted with some manner of exclusivity on PlayStation, yet they didn’t attract the same backlash.

The key difference is how its expressed. If you paid attention to the language Sony used when crowing about these exclusives, it made repeated reference to “first on PlayStation”. It’s still a little vague, in that they neglect to mention how long that lead advantage will be, but it doesn’t try to pretend that it will be forever.

Contrast that with the Tomb Raider’s GamesCom announcement, in which Crystal Dynamics head Darrell Gallagher broke the news thusly:
Blockbuster games need big partners. We've had some great support from Microsoft, and we're excited to take our partnership to new heights with Rise of the Tomb Raider, coming holiday 2015 exclusively to Xbox".
On the stage screen was a title reiterating that line "coming holiday 2015, exclusively on Xbox".

Microsoft’s Phil Harrison then entered the stage applauding and said "thank you Darrel, that's right, we're incredibly excited to have Rise of the Tomb Raider come to our platform in 2015, exclusively".



In the following days, a series of interviews from various publications would eventually prompt Xbox head Phil Spencer to confirm that the game was only exclusive for the holiday 2015 launch window, but it seems clear that there had been an intentional effort to obfuscate the fact that the game would indeed eventually be making its way elsewhere.

Square Enix also then followed up with another clarification of it’s on by way of an official FAQ stating that “Yes, our deal with Microsoft has a duration”, but not elaborating on the timeframe. But disappointingly acknowledged a fan question regarding “Why all the indirect language?” without actually explaining why, only consoling that “it didn’t intend to cause any confusion”.

To the people in games PR and marketing, this is your problem. We the audience are largely not idiots and we don’t appreciate being treated as such. It’s understandable that sensible business decisions are going to lead companies down the path of exclusivity deals when they make sense, but please just be mindful of the language used and be more up front about the deals you announce. More transparency will almost always buy you more respect from this very passionate and vocal community.





Latest Comments
ytime
Posted 05:17pm 29/8/14
Tomb Raider is a ~15 year old franchise that debuted on every single platform available at the time (5) and has been on 20 different platforms since, gone through 2 developers (Core Design/Crystal Dynamics), 2 publishers (Eidos Interactive/Square Enix) and rebooted 3 times.

I completely agree it's good business practice to go for exclusivity, a timed exclusive is probably the developers (publisher?) realising the success of a previous title came from multiple platforms.

Agree with everything. apart from the audience are generally idiotic bandwagon loving idiots.
ph33x
Posted 07:47pm 29/8/14
What's better than a timed exclusive? No timed exclusive.

It's not a reasonable business practice. The xbox is the worst performer. Why is Samsung gaining massive ground on Apple? Apple the patent wheeler. A patent is, in it's own right, an exclusive. Samsung phones perform better, but are harder to use/get used to. Apple can sue and sue and sue, yet people are still going for the better alternative. The main issue is phone users are, as a collective, much smarter than console users. There are many levels to this issue, and I'm aiming for the foundation of it all.

This doesn't even affect me cause I think TR is an average game to begin with, but like any boiling frog videogame situation, you need pretty animations and a youtube video from a total random to explain it any further.

Here's the clencher in perspective: If I was able to sell a pair of socks for $50 a pair to a blind, deaf, retard - does that make it a good business practice? If so, is it ethical? Who are you guys representing anyways? Look at the xbox DRM situation. One day into their spiel and they went back on it due to backlash. The community needs to speak up, and as reviewers you should be looking after us by empowering us to speak up, and less about the developers business practices.

To us, as gamers - it's nothing but destructive.

F***, get Zoe Quinn in here for some insight.
hardware
Posted 07:56pm 29/8/14
Timed exclusives make me angry. Since GTA.
ytime
Posted 08:56pm 29/8/14
Haha Pheex that was the best dribble I have ever read.
Arpey
Posted 12:52am 30/8/14
I'd be preordering this on the strength of the reboot if it was coming out on PC the same day, but they can wait for my money.
Commenting has been locked for this item.
5 Comments
Show