Crystal Dynamics Defends $60 Tomb Raider Port

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
I know you guys will probably have strong opinions on this subject. Do you think Crystal Dynamics should be charging $60 for a port with a tune-up?

Crystal Dynamics executive producer Scot Amos took to the Eidos forums for a Q&A, and was asked if it was justified to charge full price for a "facelift." "If it was 'only a facelift' AND we were only reselling it on the same platforms we'd already shipped on, I would see your point," Amos replied. "But as we're selling it on a new platform, with a lot of development work put in to custom craft it for the new platforms; with the new additions for the aesthetic, the physics, the particles, the lighting - taking advantage of next-gen features - so I absolutely stand by our decision to offer up Definitive Edition the way we are."
 
Sorry. Nope. Game came out a WHILE ago. This price point will turn people away.

For god sakes the PC port was fucking $5 on Steam last night. Crystal Dynamics is just fucking high.
 
all the same even with the DLC, shouldn't be more than 30-40 bucks

i bought it on steam the other day, have played ~7ish hrs (i am at the helicopter crash) good game, though honestly, i'd like less combat and more exploration and puzzles. tomb raider is about puzzles and exploration, not mowing through thug after thug to progress. (i've killed AT LEAST 100 NPC's so far)
 
The fact that they're defending it confirms that the price is BS.
 
They tweaked the visuals for PS4/XBone, which is more than developers have habitually given PC gamers for full price over the last 10 years or so.

So, yeah, totally worth $60. :rolleyes:
 
I agree with most that it shouldn't be $60, a reasonable $40 is good. They basically just took the PC version, ported it over and made adjustments to it. It's not like they had to go through a long process of making the game from scratch.
 
Honestly, they can charge whatever they want for it. That doesn't mean I will ever pay that much for it, but if they like having this just sit on shelves....so be it.
 
e current price of this generation's edition - and Crystal Dynamics says that's just how it has to be.
This was the mentality of video games when there were only a few big makers (I'm talking WAY back) such that you make every game the same price, and some do good, and those make up for those who do bad, after an indeterminate amount of time they go on sale/bargain bin/whatever. However now with a ton of different game makers you don't get this same scenario happening because your company is making maybe one game a year if that on average, so if your game does bad you're out of business. Crystal Dynamics, would be in trouble... if it wasn't for the fact that they hardly did much to port the game.
 
Just completed it the other night; playing it off and on since it's release. (was bundled with my HD7870 card)
Scored average 45fps on the bench with everything maxed at 1080p. Great visuals, the chrystal engine really shines in this game.
Liked it accept the "I've fallen in the river and can't get out" that leave Laura impaled on a pike if you don't move quick enough. That and flying through the trees with a parachute and not getting impaled again was pretty annoying.
 
xbox 360 game settings
resolution: 720p > 1080p
textures: blurry > sharp
save as xbox one game
Done and done.
 
I will agree about the "they can charge that much, but I doubt people will pay that"

The one game that DOES deserve a port is GTA 5. The things they could do with the next gen. *sigh*
 
They're charging $40-50 for Angry Birds on the next gen systems. Tomb Raider is an incredible value by comparison. In fact, they should mark it up to $70!
 
I will agree about the "they can charge that much, but I doubt people will pay that"

The one game that DOES deserve a port is GTA 5. The things they could do with the PC. *sigh*



Fixed.

(I'm eagerly awaiting that port :D)
 
They're charging $40-50 for Angry Birds on the next gen systems. Tomb Raider is an incredible value by comparison. In fact, they should mark it up to $70!

What?? lol

Now I did download Angry Birds Go for my kids to play with on their Nabi the other day. Kids being kids, one of them wanted to buy one of the better cars and OMG! It was $50. What is Rovio smoking?? People actually will spend that much money on a stupid game peice??! I'm still floored about how much they were asking. It's completely unbelievable how much money these Fee to Pay games are starting to ask.
 
I'd hate to agree to it, but isnt the same happened to GTA 4 when it was released to the PC?

I don't like the price, but it technically has been the norm as far as I can remember.

One thing I lol'd about though is the comment regarding the XBOX360, apply textures , sharp stuff, save and done, I think you made a type you mean "PC" , apply optimizations , add higher textures, sharpen stuff using next gen developer tools, cause there is no way the architecture of the xbox 360 and PS3 are easily changeable to the next gen consoles :D
 
I think tops should be 30-40 bucks for this reboot.. I paid 20 for the game not long after it came out.. Great game played it all the way though on PC.. Yea Angry Birds Star wars is 50 Bucks on XBOX one.. I couldn't belive it. I can hook my phone up to the TV or my son's Tablet and play it for free how on earth they think they can get 50 bucks for it is crazy..
 
Let's see....
Sells for $5 on pc (got EVERY Tomb Raider ever made with all DLC and comics for $15 3 months ago)...
Added a couple lines of code and charging an extra $55.
I want whatever they're smoking!
I'm sorry but this is just greed.
Hell, most of those "optimizations" were probably user created textures for the PC.
 
Let's see....
Sells for $5 on pc (got EVERY Tomb Raider ever made with all DLC and comics for $15 3 months ago)...
Added a couple lines of code and charging an extra $55.
I want whatever they're smoking!
I'm sorry but this is just greed.
Hell, most of those "optimizations" were probably user created textures for the PC.

Now that you mention it.... I wonder if that could really be the case.
 
I don't see what the problem is. The game isn't that old. And the ported it over to a new platform. Obviously for anyone that has already played the game it won't be worth $60, but for those that haven't, I think it would be "worth the price".

Though I say that in quotes, because I think all new games are a bit over priced. But that's a separate argument.
 
I don't see what the problem is. The game isn't that old. And the ported it over to a new platform. Obviously for anyone that has already played the game it won't be worth $60, but for those that haven't, I think it would be "worth the price".

Though I say that in quotes, because I think all new games are a bit over priced. But that's a separate argument.

Ugh, hate not having an edit button on this forum.

Typo... "And the ported..." should be "And they ported..."
 
Firstly, I played the game and it sucks. Oh god it sucks so much fucks. Maybe it's because I remember the old Playstation Tomb Raider games, but this game was just terrible. Firstly, I don't like the lose of control in the game. Felt like it took 30 minutes before I had any control of my character. The gameplay is extremely boring, or just not there. I can't remember if there were any puzzles, cause everything just felt too easy. Tomb Raider as a character felt like Metroid Other M, where it's a powerful female character who was typically a bad ass, but now acts like a freighted child. The game has a lot of flaws that modern games introduce. Lots of random useless crap that you collect for completion, but doesn't actually add anything to the game. Literally just time sink crap all over the game.

If there's anything good to say about the game, it would be that it looked pretty good. Though, if you wanted a good looking game then get Skyrim. At least it has gameplay. They can charge whatever they want for Tomb Raider, because it doesn't matter. The price will eventually drop to reflect the demand from the market. Which right now nobody cares about HD version of Tomb Raider. When they say $60, they mean $6.
 
I see no problem with this. They see it as worth $60. If the market says otherwise, the price will fall, but I guarantee they've done some product testing and shown that there is enough demand, at least at first, for people to pay the $60,

I have no problem with them getting what they think they can. It means more money for a sequel and an easier conversation with the publisher for more up front funding.
 
They can charge whatever they want for it.

People being willing to pay it is an entirely different matter.....
 
They can charge whatever they want for it.

People being willing to pay it is an entirely different matter.....

It's actually a good game, so I think people will. We'd have a better argument if the game sucked balls.
 
Hell no.
I DL tomb raider and it's a screwed up console port.
Was gonna buy it too.
 
They can charge whatever they want for it.

People being willing to pay it is an entirely different matter.....

Yep. They can slap whatever price tag on it they want. Curious as to how soon this version will hit the under $30 pile.
 
it was $60 (retail) when it came out in 2013...so I can see the reasoning behind charging the same price for the next-gen consoles...it's a new game for those particular systems and for those that haven't played it yet...plus all the DLC is included...games that were released on consoles first and came out on PC 6 months or more later usually sell for close to retail
 
They're charging $40-50 for Angry Birds on the next gen systems. Tomb Raider is an incredible value by comparison. In fact, they should mark it up to $70!

Corporate execs being the Fisheads that they are, I'm willing to bet that they sit around the board room with each other all day, smoking cigars with their feet up on the table, drinking scotch, grinning like Cheshire cats, and making outlandish bets about the stupidity of their sheeple base.

/Exec one: "I bet some asshole will pay $40 for a horse....."
/Exec two: "I bet some asshole will pay $50 for a saddle....."
/Exec three: "I bet someone will pay $60 to name their horse...."

I knew the industry execs lost their mind the moment I saw the pricing structure for Real Racing 3.
 
What?? lol

Now I did download Angry Birds Go for my kids to play with on their Nabi the other day. Kids being kids, one of them wanted to buy one of the better cars and OMG! It was $50. What is Rovio smoking?? People actually will spend that much money on a stupid game peice??! I'm still floored about how much they were asking. It's completely unbelievable how much money these Fee to Pay games are starting to ask.

Yeah I installed Angry Birds Go the other day and saw the $50 cars (as in more than one). Also each driver can only play a few races then you either have to wait or pay to race again. Using the driver's special power in a race costs money. Plus it still has ads. Then there are notifications that, as far as I can tell, you can't turn off. I uninstalled it.

And yes the PS4 version of Angry Birds is $50.
 
it was $60 (retail) when it came out in 2013...so I can see the reasoning behind charging the same price for the next-gen consoles...it's a new game for those particular systems and for those that haven't played it yet...plus all the DLC is included...games that were released on consoles first and came out on PC 6 months or more later usually sell for close to retail

The issue's with the $60 price tag.

#1 The game isn't good. PC Gamer gave it 75, which from a scale of 0 - 100 isn't bad, but in reality 75 is a shit rating. Cause as we know, rarely do games actually go bellow 70 in rating. So 75 is pretty shitty. Also I'm telling you it's a bad game, cause I've played it.

#2 It's HD on PC, which is only $25 right now on Steam. Steam claims normal price is $50 but we all know that's a lie. BTW console owners, for $500 you can build a better gaming PC and still save money on games. Just some FYI.

#3 It's the PC version with a high price tag. Seriously, the work they did to get it on Xbone/PS4 was minimal. It's already in x86 code, and the texture and effects are already on PC. Why the price hike, other then they do it cause they can?
 
The issue's with the $60 price tag.

#1 The game isn't good. PC Gamer gave it 75, which from a scale of 0 - 100 isn't bad, but in reality 75 is a shit rating. Cause as we know, rarely do games actually go bellow 70 in rating. So 75 is pretty shitty. Also I'm telling you it's a bad game, cause I've played it.

#2 It's HD on PC, which is only $25 right now on Steam. Steam claims normal price is $50 but we all know that's a lie. BTW console owners, for $500 you can build a better gaming PC and still save money on games. Just some FYI.

#3 It's the PC version with a high price tag. Seriously, the work they did to get it on Xbone/PS4 was minimal. It's already in x86 code, and the texture and effects are already on PC. Why the price hike, other then they do it cause they can?

It is $25 NOW on the PC. when new it didnt' cost that. The fact it is x86 code doesn't matter. You have to code for a OS not a CPU. Go try to play your windows games on Linux or a Mac without any special software and let me know how that works, try to play your new games on windows 95.

I honestly don't see the problem with them wanting to start the game out at $60. It is about possible profit not numbers of units sold. Those that want it on the PC are going to buy it on the PC, those that wanted it on the older generation will buy it on the older generation. For those that are buying it on the new generation they are doing so because they never played the game before and now want to. When GTA comes out on the new gen consoles, I expect it to be just as much. They are having to do work to code the engine for the next gen console. Same code doesn't work on both systems, so they are having to put effort into make a game engine even if they are using existing code as the base and just swapping out some stuff. they are having to test the game, they are having to optimize the game... so they are putting work into the game. On top of that they already are going to have a small base for the game. Of course they are going to sell it at full price for a while then will start to lower it as needed. But they want to try to maximize profits as much as possible which makes sense to me.

And yes I have the game on the PC, wasn't a huge fan of it. Never played any of the other games in the series, but it wasn't very puzzle based as I would have expected it to be.
 
It is $25 NOW on the PC. when new it didnt' cost that.
When Sonic CD was new for Sega CD, it was $60. But when they ported over to Android with graphics and controls, it's not $60.
The fact it is x86 code doesn't matter. You have to code for a OS not a CPU. Go try to play your windows games on Linux or a Mac without any special software and let me know how that works, try to play your new games on windows 95.
That's not the same thing. The development tools they have, literally allows them to port their code over with minimal effort. Especially with Xbox One, where Microsoft tools makes PC and Xbone ports so easy, it can be done over the weekend. PS4 is obviously more work, cause it runs FreeBSD, but not that much more, unless the game is already running on Linux, which as far as I know there isn't a Tomb Raider for linux.
On top of that they already are going to have a small base for the game. Of course they are going to sell it at full price for a while then will start to lower it as needed. But they want to try to maximize profits as much as possible which makes sense to me.
It's more about not reducing the value of gaming on console platforms, then maximizing profit. If that were the case, then why does Steam sell games at lower prices? At some point you realize that customers are only willing to spend money on games at certain prices, and you make more profit when you lower prices to push products then to hold onto the $60 price point.

A lot of people here don't realize that the $60 price point is dead. If there's a reason why consoles are failing, it's this reason. They can charge what they want for the game, but by March that game is $10 due to market demand. Very few games can ask for $60, and Tomb Raider isn't one of them.
 
Smoking crack.

Should be a $29.99 - $34.99 console game...at most.
 
When Sonic CD was new for Sega CD, it was $60. But when they ported over to Android with graphics and controls, it's not $60.

That's not the same thing. The development tools they have, literally allows them to port their code over with minimal effort. Especially with Xbox One, where Microsoft tools makes PC and Xbone ports so easy, it can be done over the weekend. PS4 is obviously more work, cause it runs FreeBSD, but not that much more, unless the game is already running on Linux, which as far as I know there isn't a Tomb Raider for linux.

It's more about not reducing the value of gaming on console platforms, then maximizing profit. If that were the case, then why does Steam sell games at lower prices? At some point you realize that customers are only willing to spend money on games at certain prices, and you make more profit when you lower prices to push products then to hold onto the $60 price point.

A lot of people here don't realize that the $60 price point is dead. If there's a reason why consoles are failing, it's this reason. They can charge what they want for the game, but by March that game is $10 due to market demand. Very few games can ask for $60, and Tomb Raider isn't one of them.

Steam sells don't hit the second week a game comes out and sell them for $5. Game goes on sell at full price and they get all the people that want it right away. You then start seeing small 10 or 15% discounts after a month or so. This might make it look better to a few more people, then you start seeing the 33% percent after a few months, then later the higher discounts. at the same time start seeing the price drop. Haven't ever saw a new game on day one for $5 or $10.

standard prices when something is new is $50 for PC, $60 for console. that price point doesn't seem to be dead. That said some people do wait till they get the game cheaper, but that isn't ALL people. And consoles aren't failing, games on them seem to be doing just fine. while of course not all games are going to sell the same, just look at something like GTA5.

Do I buy all games day one at full price, no I don't. some I buy because I see they have gotten down to cheap and decide that it is worth $20 to give them a try. But I am not the audience of the developers. no more than somebody that only buys used games at gamestop is as they make 0 profit off of those people, just like they make almost 0 profit off of me for waiting till steam has a sell for 66% - 80% off to get a few games. But I also have stacks of games purchased day one or week one for full price. Hell, the fact that people bought BF4 and suffered through the game and its issues show that people will pay full price for games.
 
If the game was well worth the $60 a year ago, why is an improved version not worth it now? If you've already played it, this obviously isn't for you. Anyone who already owned it probably wouldn't be any more enticed to re-buy it for $30 than they would be at $60. It's still the same game after all. For those who never got around to it though, the game is great, and forking over full price for the best possible version (PC version aside) isn't unreasonable.

Perhaps they could come up with a promotion similar to the current current gen to next gen upgrades, for the handful of people who do have it on an existing console and want to upgrade. I don't think it would be the same $10 as most games are now, given that it would probably then be cheaper to just buy a used copy and trade it in. But to see it for $20-$30 with a trade in of last gen, or $60 outright for a first-time buyer... why the hell not?

They really have nothing to lose by charging $60. They cant have put a whole bunch of money into the port. Even if no one buys it, they can drop the price to entice people with nothing lost for their effort.
 
Back
Top