For news, discussions and memes!
This community follows the Lemmy.zip Instance rules, with the inclusion of the following rule:
You can see Lemmy.zip's rules by going to our Code of Conduct.
What to Expect in Our Code of Conduct:
If you enjoy reading legal stuff, you can check it all out at legal.lemmy.zip.
Am I the only one who already won't be buying GTA VI? I've seen what they did with V, and VI looks to be more of the same. Pay full price for the game, then pay to win.
Fuck off Rockstar.
If there is a large, well made single player campaign then I couldn't care less about whether the multiplayer is pay to win. The last one was really fun, and I hope this upcoming one is the same.
Then again, I could care less. It would be fun to also get a good multiplayer but I guess I have no real hope for that.
Only one GTA game has had an online component. Every GTA game since 3 has been a best-in-class, genre/generation-defining singleplayer experience.
You pay for the singleplayer. The online bit is just gravy. Some people like said gravy enough to fund the development of Rockstar's next game. I see nothing wrong with this.
GTA IV and GTA V both went online. GTA V made online the core component of it's game. So much so, that they innitially considered GTA Online to be a seperate game included with GTA V.
GTA V has recieved COUNTLESS dlc to the online portion. I'm unaware of ANY single player dlc released beyond the pre-order bonuses. This shows you where Rockstar's priorities lay. They have made more money via shark cards, many times over, than they ever did with the sale of the game itself.
At least Rocket League had the decency to understand they made more money off DLC sales and made the game free. And to my knowledge those DLCs aren't even performance changing. It's just stuff like "here's a topper for your car liscensed from a popular tv show or movie"
Oh, did GTA IV have multiplayer? That's the one I'm least familiar with. Must not have been nearly as robust as GTA V's.
GTA V made online the core component of it's game. So much so, that they innitially considered GTA Online to be a seperate game included with GTA V.
You contradicted yourself there. GTA Online can't be both a core component of GTA V and a standalone game.
So Rockstar, who already had the most financially successful game of all time in GTA V from game sales alone, put its resources into the online component in order to fund the development of its sequel. It's not like they needed to attract new players to the single player game, being, again, that it was the most successful game of all time. Technically it was the most successful media venture of all time (it made more money than any movie, music, or game ever).
If they hadn't done that, GTA VI and RDR 2 would've had smaller budgets and likely wouldn't have been as good.
I see nothing wrong with this.
I didn't contridict myself. I said they CONSIDERED making it a standalone game. They wanted to pour enough effort into the online, and no more effort into the single player, that they figured they could just make it it's own game, until that news leaked, and people reacted FIERCELY.
At one time Sony CONSIDERED making the PS4 digital only, with used games not being an option. Doesn't mean that ever actually came to pass, but it WAS considered at one point. It shows what their intentions were. That's the difference, and the point of that statement.
Tldr
The offer, which Ware describes as for “a buyout of any future royalties from the game”, was allegedly for $7500
In another post it was said that $7500 per member was offered, totaling to $22500.
Which is still not a lot for giving up all future royalties, but their counter offer of 10x that ($225'000 in total) is a little much in my opinion as well.
But I'm still glad they spoke out, this way a more open discussion can happen about this topic.
For selling out all future royalties for a game in as huge and popular a franchise as GTA? Yeah, i think that counter offer is pretty fair actually
They swing low you swing back high and maybe find somewhere in the middle.