TR:Legen on the BBC website

Archived from groups: alt.games.tombraider (More info?)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4574839.stm

cheers,

dr.sarcasto
--
it's all right; i'm a doctor
5 answers Last reply
More about legen website
  1. Archived from groups: alt.games.tombraider (More info?)

    "dr. sarcasto" <laughing@y.ou> wrote in message
    news:pan.2005.05.24.17.08.17.941925@y.ou
    > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4574839.stm
    >
    > cheers,
    >
    > dr.sarcasto

    Nice! Oh, they've moved the release up a season! It was just "winter"
    now it's "autumn". Cool :)
    McG.
  2. Archived from groups: alt.games.tombraider (More info?)

    In article <pan.2005.05.24.17.08.17.941925@y.ou>,
    "dr. sarcasto" <laughing@y.ou> wrote:

    > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4574839.stm

    Maybe I've been living in a cave too long... but wasn't Eidos to blame
    for some of the problems with AoD? I could have sworn that THEY were the
    ones that insisted it be released before it was really ready...

    And now they are blaming Core Design for everything that was wrong with
    it?

    Of course... aren't all of those guys now gone with the SCi
    buyout/purchase...? (One hopes anyway...)

    But what do I know...

    -Andy-
  3. Archived from groups: alt.games.tombraider (More info?)

    In the dead of night, a faint whisper from dr. sarcasto was heard, at
    about 05/24/2005 01:08 PM, and I could have sworn it said ...
    >
    > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4574839.stm
    >
    > cheers,
    >
    > dr.sarcasto

    Thanks for that ...

    <wonders why its not listed in his BBS News RSS feed?>

    I have to say that the article is concise and in my mind, right on
    target. They pinpointed the big "IF" ... will the controls be up to
    snuff!? Unfortunately, that question, as they reiterated, goes totally
    unanswered.

    Did like the pics though. I wonder if, since she seems to be hanging
    from that pole without swinging, can she stand on it? And the good old
    rope swing is still there, I see.

    ---
    PW
  4. Archived from groups: alt.games.tombraider (More info?)

    "-Andy-" <see2go4me@spamworm.yahoop.calm> wrote in message
    news:see2go4me-C6D23C.00380225052005@news.giganews.com
    > In article <pan.2005.05.24.17.08.17.941925@y.ou>,
    > "dr. sarcasto" <laughing@y.ou> wrote:
    >
    >> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4574839.stm
    >
    > Maybe I've been living in a cave too long... but wasn't Eidos to blame
    > for some of the problems with AoD? I could have sworn that THEY were
    > the ones that insisted it be released before it was really ready...
    >
    > And now they are blaming Core Design for everything that was wrong
    > with it?
    >
    > Of course... aren't all of those guys now gone with the SCi
    > buyout/purchase...? (One hopes anyway...)
    >
    > But what do I know...
    >
    > -Andy-

    From the looks of it; Some folks say that Core really dragged their
    feet on AoD. They had like 3 years to get it all together. Yes, Eidos
    did push it really hard at the end, just to get it released in time for
    the revenue it generated to put some cashflow on their books for the
    closing of the fiscal year.
    Personally, I think that Core might well have 'stonewalled' on AoD a lot
    because of the publishers meddling with Core internally. It's apparent
    there's been some enmity in Core about Eidos for a number of years. I
    don't think for a moment they ever had a 'great' working relationship.
    So I got to wonder why Core sold out to Eidos in the first place.

    Eidos has been in deep doo doo for a long time. It got a lot deeper
    during development of AoD. I think Core may have HOPED Eidos failed
    and collapsed.

    Wheeling and dealing talks of trading and buying and selling is a
    constant with upper management and all boards of directors.

    When AoD flopped mightily, Eidos goes ballistic publicly, trounces Core,
    takes the Tombraider franchise from them and hands it over to Crystal
    Dynamics. CD is owned by another Brit publisher, SCi. That's a very
    interesting bit all by itself.
    Eidos is on the bid for liquidation. SCi takes over Eidos. SCi's
    wholly owned company, CD, already has a key title of Eidos....
    interesting turns of events. So now SCi owns another publishing house,
    which owns the TR game franchise, which is having another new TR title
    developed by a company SCi already owns. Screwy huh? And awfully
    convenient for SCi.
    McG.
  5. Archived from groups: alt.games.tombraider (More info?)

    McGrandpa wrote:
    >
    > "-Andy-" <see2go4me@spamworm.yahoop.calm> wrote in message
    > news:see2go4me-C6D23C.00380225052005@news.giganews.com
    > > In article <pan.2005.05.24.17.08.17.941925@y.ou>,
    > > "dr. sarcasto" <laughing@y.ou> wrote:
    > >
    > >> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4574839.stm
    > >
    > > Maybe I've been living in a cave too long... but wasn't Eidos to blame
    > > for some of the problems with AoD? I could have sworn that THEY were
    > > the ones that insisted it be released before it was really ready...
    > >
    > > And now they are blaming Core Design for everything that was wrong
    > > with it?
    > >
    > > Of course... aren't all of those guys now gone with the SCi
    > > buyout/purchase...? (One hopes anyway...)
    > >
    > > But what do I know...
    > >
    > > -Andy-
    >
    > From the looks of it; Some folks say that Core really dragged their
    > feet on AoD. They had like 3 years to get it all together.

    You know... there could have been some very valid reasons for that.
    Who knows (among us) what was really going on behind the scenes and
    what Eidos was telling/demanding of Core. By this time, with TR and
    Lara getting so big, maybe there were too many cooks working on this
    broth... Maybe AoD was being designed by committee. :/

    > Yes, Eidos
    > did push it really hard at the end, just to get it released in time for
    > the revenue it generated to put some cashflow on their books for the
    > closing of the fiscal year.
    > Personally, I think that Core might well have 'stonewalled' on AoD a lot
    > because of the publishers meddling with Core internally. It's apparent
    > there's been some enmity in Core about Eidos for a number of years. I
    > don't think for a moment they ever had a 'great' working relationship.
    > So I got to wonder why Core sold out to Eidos in the first place.

    Maybe they didn't have much of a choice. Or Eidos seemed like a good
    idea at the time.

    > Eidos has been in deep doo doo for a long time. It got a lot deeper
    > during development of AoD. I think Core may have HOPED Eidos failed
    > and collapsed.
    >
    > Wheeling and dealing talks of trading and buying and selling is a
    > constant with upper management and all boards of directors.
    >
    > When AoD flopped mightily, Eidos goes ballistic publicly, trounces Core,
    > takes the Tombraider franchise from them and hands it over to Crystal
    > Dynamics. CD is owned by another Brit publisher, SCi. That's a very
    > interesting bit all by itself.
    > Eidos is on the bid for liquidation. SCi takes over Eidos. SCi's
    > wholly owned company, CD, already has a key title of Eidos....
    > interesting turns of events. So now SCi owns another publishing house,
    > which owns the TR game franchise, which is having another new TR title
    > developed by a company SCi already owns. Screwy huh? And awfully
    > convenient for SCi.
    > McG.

    This is the first I've heard that CD was owned by SCi. I read that
    CD was owned by Eidos, like Core.

    -- G
Ask a new question

Read More

Games Video Games