Why Tomb Raider won't release on Wii U

By Wesley Yin-Poole Published 26 January, 2012

Mac version confirmed.

Crystal Dynamics has explained why PC, PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 game Tomb Raider will not release on Wii U.

Global brand director Karl Stewart said development on the hotly-anticipated reboot began long before the announcement of the Wii U - and it wouldn't be right to simply port the game to Nintendo's tablet-fuelled Wii successor.

"When we started developing the game we made a conscious decision that it was all about building the game for a platform and making sure the game was specific to that platform," Stewart told the Crystal Habit Podcast (via the Eidos forum.

"Given that we've been working on the game quite a while before Wii U was announced I think it would not be right to try and port it across. If we started building a game for the Wii U we would build it very differently and we would build it with unique functionality."

The game will, however, launch on Mac. Eidos is in discussions with a company to bring it to the platform, but Stewart was unable to guarantee it will launch alongside the PC, PS3 and Xbox 360 versions' confirmed global simultaneous release - expected this year.

Picture of Wesley.

About Wesley Yin-Poole

Wesley is Eurogamer's news editor. He likes news, interviews, and more news. He also likes Street Fighter more than anyone can get him to shut up about it.

Read more articles from Wesley by visiting the Wesley Yin-Poole archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (52) Latest comment 4 weeks ago

  • unacomn #1 4 weeks ago

    That awkward moment when a Mac is considered a better gaming platform than the Wii U.

  • wizlon #2 4 weeks ago

    That decision kinda makes sense, but I'm not sure, a quick port with an inventory on the screen wouldn't add much but would be welcome as opposed to no version.

  • superted1974 #3 4 weeks ago

    And there was me hoping Wii U would play normal games.

    Developers still not keen to release a game on it without building in waggle and extra screen support.

    Shame.

  • PeacockDreams #4 4 weeks ago

    What a result for Mac users! I bet they cant wait for this to arrive in time for christmas 2014

  • abigsmurf #5 4 weeks ago

    Seems a weird decision, given the Wii U is set to be notably more powerful than the 360 and PS3 based on current rumours, it shouldn't take long at all for them to do a port.

    Although the tablet controls could be pointless and gimmicky if the game isn't designed with them in mind, I'm sure running the game at 1080p and/or at 60fps would justify a port.

  • Yuroko #6 4 weeks ago

    Until the WiiU turns out to be a massive success then it will turn to "Let's shoe horn this fucker onto it as soon as possible!".

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #7 4 weeks ago

    Any mac owner who wants to play core games really ought to have Boot Camp set up, even if it's only using a re-purposed old XP license. Anything I've tried that's cross platform (Cheers, Steam Play) runs a lot more smoothly in Windows than OSX.

  • MattEdWithCheese #8 4 weeks ago

    Lol, just dualbooted my MacBook too... XD

    Edit: I like that any mention that I own something created by Apple that isn't an iPhone gets me negged...
    Edited by 1 at 26/01/12 @ 11:27

  • andisart #9 4 weeks ago

    that's a lazy excuse. developers dont necessarily have to make use of the Wii U controller. isn't it better to have it on Wii U without special functions than not having it at all. For players and for the publisher (more profit). The Xbox, PS3 and PC versions probably dont have special features.

  • CallousB #10 4 weeks ago

    I'm sure most Wii U owners would rather have the best version of a quality multi format game...

    ...than an original Tomb Raider game with a tiny budget, made by a D-Team and half assed...and which you won't market so it won't sell.

    You would have had 16 months to port the code between the time Wii U was officially announced and Tomb Raider launches.

    The Darksiders 2 team had a Wii U build running in 5 weeks. Just bung the inventory and map on the controller screen..that's all most hardcore gamers would want.
    Edited by 3 at 26/01/12 @ 11:07

  • rtk79 #11 4 weeks ago

    @unacomn : Did you read the article at all ?

  • FogHeart #12 4 weeks ago

    Nintendo's design of the Wii U, putting in twin sticks, face buttons, triggers etc marks a very deliberate attempt to ensure that third parties will go triple-platform, rather than the way it was this gen - PS360 and then something different and unique for the Wii. If third parties end up doing the same thing all over again it's a disaster. I'm sure Nintendo would rather this game were released on the Wii U without motion or touchpad features than not at all.
    Edited by 2 at 26/01/12 @ 12:37

  • arcam #13 4 weeks ago

    I don't think it's a lazy excuse or bullshit. They've obviously decided that a straight port would not be enough to convince anyone to get it over the console or PC versions. I think just like the Wii, many developers will feel they have to do something different or unique on the Wii U to get much success. They could be wrong, but when you look at the history of ports on the Wii you can't blame them for being cautious.

    @FogHeart - Same thoughts as me it seems, with a slightly different spin on it. But I hope Nintendo aren't banking on multi-platform support - that will only last for a year or so, because when the new consoles come out the Wii U will be underpowered again in comparison and will struggle to get ports for the same reasons as the Wii.
    Edited by 1 at 26/01/12 @ 11:14

  • madjim #14 4 weeks ago

    A port running at 1080p with superior tech than the other consoles? I'd buy it, even if the tablet was to no serious use.

  • riz23 #15 4 weeks ago

    Actually I think he gives a plausible and sensible explanation. I would have made the same decision for technical and financial reasons.

  • God_Octo #16 4 weeks ago

    Eidos isn't just going to lazily port the game over to every system from the 360?! What? What have they done with the real Eidos?

  • Dave52 #17 4 weeks ago

    "it wouldn't be right to simply port the game to Nintendo's tablet-fuelled Wii successor"

    I suspect that's what a lot of the game creators are gonna do. I can't imagine Ubisoft not releasing all of it's previous Assassin's Creeds for the platform.

    Money, money, money...!

  • RoOhDaMite #18 4 weeks ago

    I hope they'll give it the special edition treatment then.

  • arcam #19 4 weeks ago

    @gotyourmoney Well, it is said in a PR-type way as is to be expected, but the underlying conclusion is still the same - they don't want to make a Wii U version that is the same as the PS360 versions, because they're still unsure about how well such a port would do.

    Wishful thinking doesn't really come into it - I don't really mind whether the Wii U gets a port or not because I don't expect to be buying one.

  • FanBoysSuck #20 4 weeks ago

    So is this a native Mac version or an emulation jobbie?

    Just curious.

  • unacomn #21 4 weeks ago

    @rtk79 Yes, but the joke was too good to pass up.

  • des #22 4 weeks ago

    Mac>WiiU

    WiiUlol

  • md99 #23 4 weeks ago

    This is something Nintendo owners will have to get used to. Again.

  • FatalHybrid #24 4 weeks ago

    @superted1974 Probably not allowed to Nintendo put a lot of time into these experimental control schemes I assume they would want developers to use them.

  • DrStrangelove #25 4 weeks ago

    @MattEdWithCheese

    Sorry, but I just pos'd you.

    Also, try just saying somewhere in a comments section "I have an iPhone."

    Good luck with not getting negged there.

  • Dangerous_Dan #26 4 weeks ago

    I guess they are weighing costs for a port to Wii U with the potential sales, which will likely be small at that time. People buy that console for Mario and Zelda and since they are the "games must be fun"* crowd there will likely not be a lot of 3rd party support unless porting is very easy.

    *yes I get it, fun does mean colorful and cute characters with solid established gameplay.

  • NHDavid #27 4 weeks ago

    Wii U = P U

  • kangarootoo #28 4 weeks ago

    Makes perfect business sense.

    Spend extra money and human resource porting an already-well-into-development title, for a platform that is currently unreleased (and therefore for which the first year installed base is unknown), for a platform that is likely to be owned by a lower percentage of your target market than the existing platforms, for a platform for which many of the early adopters will already own one of the other existing platforms anyway (that is an awful sentence segment), that will not differ in gameplay from the already planned versions, and that will put the existing versions at risk due to logistical buggering about.

    Or don't.

    Nobody with any financial sense would choose the former. I'd be amazed if they would even break even, let alone make enough profit to make it worth the risk and hassle. Common sense is not an "anti-WiiU fanboy" sentiment you know.

  • Darren #29 4 weeks ago

    From what I've read over the past few years an awful lot of third-party games have failed to sell in sufficient numbers on the Wii despite it having a much larger number of users than either the 360 or PS3. This may mean many of the smaller publishers may choose to be more cautious about what kind of games they release on the Wii U; even choosing to wait to see how successful it is first and how the third-party games are selling before committing to it. I can't say I'd blame them.

  • Darren #30 4 weeks ago

    @madjim - Just buy it on the PC then! Even a mid-spec PC can run the previous three Tomb Raider games with ease at 1080p and it'll be cheaper than any of the console versions too. ;)

  • Bigmac1910 #31 4 weeks ago

    Do they have to use that screen for anything, just put a picture of her butt there and let me use the controller as a "gasp" normal gamepad.

  • sugarbaron #32 4 weeks ago

    Wii-U: the ginger haired step-child of the next gen of consoles.

  • Mister-Wario #33 4 weeks ago

    I think I understand the reasoning behind this. Wii U games need to show, at this stage, how the touchscreen is going to revolutionise gaming. If it's just going to be a straight port of the other versions, what's the point of the Wii U? What makes it stand out? Yes, the Wii U ought to be on par with the other consoles, but its controller means it needs to differentiate itself as well.

  • Obli #34 4 weeks ago

    My interpretation: the Wii-U has no user base (and it will initially be small compared to the other target platforms) so it's not worth our efforts. We'll jump on the platform if it sells like hot cakes.

    Also, since when doe Wii U games HAVE to make use of the tablet controller? I assume there are no such gimmicks for the other consoles / PC, so why not just have a sweet looking version running at 60FPS 1080P on the Wii U? That would make it stand out.

  • Les #35 4 weeks ago

    "Any mac owner who wants to play core games really ought to have Boot Camp set up, even if it's only using a re-purposed old XP license"

    Still true unfortunately but it looks like times are 'a changing. I happily suffer a slightly worse gaming experience for not having to boot into Windows. I can't remember the last time I actually used Bootcamp.

    And that's not just because I hate Windows. But all my other applications, files, etc. are on the Mac side of the machine. And constantly rebooting from one OS to the next gets old pretty soon.

    Must say I primarily play games where frame rate doesn't impact the play experience too much though (Civ, Europa Universalis, etc.)

  • super_monty #36 4 weeks ago

    @MENTAL1ST I am setting mine to bootcamp soon, got an old fujitsu disk but might buy windows 7.

  • super_monty #37 4 weeks ago

    I have got a MAC neg away bitches.

  • Mister-Wario #38 4 weeks ago

    @Obli How does something that looks and plays almost exactly like its PS360 counterpart make its console stand out? How much is this console going to be? Why should I pay however much for a slightly prettier version when I can get one for a machine I already own?

    Of course the Wii U doesn't have to use the tablet. But if it doesn't, why buy the console unless you're getting Mario or Zelda? And what if you don't like those franchises?

  • Kami #39 4 weeks ago

    Meh. I suppose there's not much TO display on the tablet tbh. Tomb Raider Anniversary is evidence of that much; didn't really need it. It'd be nice, sure, maps and stuff, but hardly essential to the experience.

    Speaking of which, I still like the possibilities that opens up - whether we'll see them from launch day or not remains to be seen, but there's plenty of scope in the Wii-U controller to do quite a bit.

    Overall however, I suspect there's more to this than we're being told... even if it was a cheap and dirty port with no added functionality, others are porting - and hailing the ease of porting. Why would you cut out a potential slice of market?

    Something doesn't add up in this...

  • kangarootoo #40 4 weeks ago

    @JAGUARCD32x

    "All it would take is a mix of art assets from the PC and console versions..."

    And a WiiU dev kit, and a WiiU engineer to port it and fix bugs, and a separate QA testing plan, and a separate targeted marketing campaign. And some other bits I've probably overlooked.

    "...and you have the wiiu version"


    @Kami

    The others that are hailing the ease of porting may not actually break even on that investment, and may regret it for business reasons.

    I honestly don't know either way. I just find all this talk of "something doesn't add up" a bit puzzling. It might be possible to do a quick and dirty port, but that doesn't mean its a good idea or that CD are wrong to set their sights a little higher than quick and dirty.


    "Why would you cut out a potential slice of market?"

    Because the market is too small? Because the market would be cannibalising sales of the same title from another platform?


    Why are people so quick to call bullshit, "we aren't being told the full story", and various other conspiracy theorist accusations, when their decision simply makes good sense? Occam's razor applies.

  • Incarta #41 4 weeks ago

    Eidos' loss if you ask me.

  • vert1go #42 4 weeks ago

    "Nintendo's tablet-fuelled Wii successor."

    It isn't a tablet. It's a controller with a touch screen.

  • Kami #43 4 weeks ago

    @kangarootoo; Because we don't KNOW the Wii-U will be a small slice of the market. If the Wii is anything to go by, the actual potential install base is massive.

    Far from cannibalising sales from another platform, there's the opportunity to be there right from the very start on a new machine. Launches for consoles usually end up with only a few select titles there; and most are usually updates or ports. The Wii-U will likely be no different - and the potential sales there for a good game (even if it is a dirty port) are quite large. This makes jumping in on a new console release actually, surprisingly, quite a good business decision, especially if all the game needs is a minor touching up, or a rejigging of controls.

    So, good business decision it ain't. So what are the other reasons we can rule out? Power - well, Mass Effect 3 port to Wii-U says no to that one. Market - the 3DS did take a while to take off. And the Vita is struggling. They may be hedging their bets.

    And ultimately, there is that insinuation that a Tomb Raider for Wii-U may be on the cards, just not -this- Tomb Raider. Something built entirely for the system, although one can quite justifiably ask why a complete game can't be ported to another console and yet be ported to the Mac...

    The reason I find it bizarre is in no way does it make sense. In terms of basic business - it's actually a pretty piss-poor decision.

    Let's hope it doesn't come back to bite them in the ass... whatever the motivations are behind it.

  • Obli #44 4 weeks ago

    @Mister-Wario If the Wii U does have a decent bit more power than the 360 and PS3, 1080P @ 60FPS would make it stand out for me next to 720P @ 30FPS.

  • smelly #45 4 weeks ago

    They know they'd have to make the graphics considerably better than the other console versions for it to compete with other wii-u titles...

    As was said earlier this week, the 720* is ONLY 20% more powerful than the wii-u, but is due to be released a WHOLE year later.... That'd suggest the wii-u is a bit of a graphical powerhouse, when a machine released 1 year later only has 20% more power.

    ... So a straight 360/ps3 port would probably look a bit crappy compared to other wii-u titles....

  • smelly #46 4 weeks ago

    * 720 = next xbox whatever its called.

  • cloudskipa #47 4 weeks ago

    Oh God listen to some of you guys, I sure Nintendo fans are sooo devastated at the prospect of not being able to play another average, dumbed-down version of Tomb Raider squarely game aimed at Uncharted fans, that'd be just the reason why they bought a Wii-U I'm sure!

    Tomb Raider made it onto the Wii in various forms just fine so what the developer actually said there can signify many things. The Wii-U has a lot of potential, though I don't expect the majority of today's simpleton gamers with no imagination to see that. The Wii-U can do better than last gen 360/PS3 ports haha and in this case we don't want them thank you. You can keep your "normal games for normal people with normal tastes" cheers

  • Bulbatron #48 4 weeks ago

    Nice to see developers embracing Macs. I think mine's a bit too old to run newer games, though Penumbra and Amnesia both work fine.

    Still, good news for people wirh newer machines.

  • SavageEvil #49 4 weeks ago

    Guaranteed if the Wii U sells like hotcakes this very same Tomb Raider will make an appearance, that you can take to the bank. Made from the ground up with unique functionality, my arse. Utter BS if I ever read some, Wii U still sports a controller interface like the other systems and supports HD resolutions and more powerful processors, where is the problem? It's the wait and see approach from Eidos nothing more, Wii U has no market share to sell to and the PS3 and 360 both have millions, you do the math.

    I'm waiting, Wii U starts flying off shelves come launch time, watch Eidos scramble to make a port with tacked on gimmick controls and basically contradict what was said in this interview. My point, don't make comments that you know you might end up eating in the end. Just talk to truth and keep it moving.

  • smelly #50 4 weeks ago

    Im not the one claiming the next xbox isnt that much more powerful than the wii u...

    Im just regurgitating what i've been told on the nets.

    But if true, that'd make the wii-u more powerful than current pc's.

  • kangarootoo #51 4 weeks ago

    @Kami

    Well no, we don't KNOW that. But that is kind of the point isn't it? You don't invest in something just becauase you don't know for sure it will be a massive mistake, you invest because you know to a fair degree it will be a success.


    "If the Wii is anything to go by, the actual potential install base is massive."

    But you and I both know the massive installed base of Wii customers aren't buying Tomb Raider. There will be a significant number of owners who play that sort of thing, but the bulk of the owners are playing Sports Resort, Wii Fit, or in many cases... nothing at all.



    "Far from cannibalising sales from another platform, there's the opportunity to be there right from the very start on a new machine"

    I'm not sure the two are mutually exclusive. Also, you seem to be attributing inherrent value to "being there right from the start", but I'm unclear as to what you think that value is. Makeprofit on an existing platform, or lose money on a new one but be "right there from the start". If profit isn't part of the picture, what is it you think will be gained (real question - I'm sure there is something)?

    Just to clarify, canninbalising sales means your new sale is at the cost of an existing one. In this case, many of the WiiU sales of TR would be at the cost of a sale on one of the established platforms, and yet for reasons already discussed it would cost CD more. So in the end, less profit on the same sale.



    "So, good business decision it ain't. So what are the other reasons we can rule out?"

    Hehe, I like your confidence :)


    On the power front, I agree. That is probably not a barrier, and I'm not sure they have suggested it is. I'm honestly not interested in you and I making opposing lists of platform features, you should know I'm not a platform fanboy. All I am saying is that CD's decision makes sense, and to make that decision they don't need a big list - one good reason "not to" is quite enough.


    "And ultimately, there is that insinuation that a Tomb Raider for Wii-U may be on the cards, just not -this- Tomb Raider"

    Right, a future product that is planned from the start. Just not a version already in dev. A future version with its own budget, risk assessments, and dev team makes reasonable sense, and I'm sure the end result will be a lot of fun. And if a bespoke WiiU comes later in the day, the predicted sales of the platform will be more reliable and the budget and timeframe can be planned accordingly, so its all good news.



    "although one can quite justifiably ask why a complete game can't be ported to another console and yet be ported to the Mac..."

    Because they aren't the same thing. A Mac is technically almost a PC these days, and also has an identical set of input devices to consider. The Wii is not anything like a PS3 or a 360, in the way that an intel based Mac is extremely like a PC. But all that aside, the main reason is probably that they already have a team of Mac dev engineers, but would have to hire new people to port a WiiU version (and have WiiU devs kits and license agreements, as already mentioned).



    "The reason I find it bizarre is in no way does it make sense. In terms of basic business - it's actually a pretty piss-poor decision."

    Well we seem to have come to one of those impasses, where we have two possible options. Option a) an experienced development team backed by an experienced publisher have made the right business decision, and you are simply wrong, or option b) you alone are right, and they are all bonkers and incompetant. I have to say, occam's razor still applies.
    Edited by 1 at 27/01/12 @ 09:41

  • kangarootoo #52 4 weeks ago

    @JAGUARCD32x

    "Don't you think some thing said as simple as that would save all the speculation?"

    Probably, but that is because they likely know the sort of response that would get. It is much more saleable to give creative reasons than logistical reasons, and just imagine the response from the internet if they said "we wouldn't expect to make enough money for it to be worth the effort". And if they said "the WiiU owners that would buy our game likely already own one of the other platforms anyway because thats where all the more hardcore games are", there would be a shit storm of angry Nintendo fans beating down their door.

    But that doesn't mean anything suspicious is going on. I understand that some people WANT a WiiU version, and that is totally cool, but we should be able to separate that desire from a clear view of the situation. Seems like some people are choosing to believe the facts they like, and trying to discredit the ones they don't.
    Edited by 1 at 27/01/12 @ 09:44