GTA Silence Hurting Take-Two, Says Analyst

Andy Chalk

One Flag, One Fleet, One Cat
Nov 12, 2002
45,698
0
0
GTA Silence Hurting Take-Two, Says Analyst


Industry analyst Michael Pachter says silence on the Take-Two Interactive [http://www.rockstargames.com/IV/] because it's putting off investors who might otherwise be interested in the company.

Pachter said management was showing poor judgment by keeping mum on the GTA front, even if development on the next title is still in the early stages. While denying the popular misconception that Take-Two is a "one-hit wonder," he made the obvious point that the Grand Theft Auto series is far and away its most important franchise and said that the "lack of visibility" regarding the next release could be causing hesitation among investors.

"Dan Houser, one of the three key employees behind the franchise, said in a recent interview that the trio hadn't even thought of the locale for the next installment, let alone the plot," Pachter wrote in an investors' note. "While we find this unfathomable, if it is true, it suggests that there will not be another installment of GTA until late 2011 at the earliest, putting the game on a three and a half year release cycle."

"In our view, if the company's most important franchise is on a three and a half year schedule, management owes its shareholders the obligation of informing them of this fact. With no visibility into the timing of the next installment of GTA, we think that many investors will remain skeptical of the Take-Two story," he continued.

Pachter said Take-Two currently brings at least eight "bona fide franchises" to the table and has the potential to raise that number up to 10 or 12, but is hampered, ironically, by "high expectations and high quality standards" that inevitably lead to delays. "If Take-Two can deliver its franchises on a more compressed schedule, its earnings power would essentially double, and the stock would command a much higher price," he concluded.

Just in case you needed more proof that making great games and making lots of money don't necessarily have much to do with each other.

Source: GamesIndustry [http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/lack-of-gta-visibility-putting-off-take-two-investors]


Permalink
 

Woodsey

New member
Aug 9, 2009
14,553
0
0
Why would that be a concern?

I don't think it's a sign they're just going to drop one of the most successful franchises ever. I doubt anyone who could invest would be worried about when they announce the game, not if they've done their research at least.
 

Swaki

New member
Apr 15, 2009
2,015
0
0
i know that videogames are a business first, then an source of entertainment and lastly an art form, but really, they want them to rush their games, keeping them on a strict cycle?.

does no one remember ET?!, it died for our sins.
 

Jared

The British Paladin
Jul 14, 2009
5,630
0
0
I think its a tad bit early if they have not even got a setting, I mean, seriously what could they announce?

Likely they will announce near to the time, and then people can start getting interested. No point in creating unneeded hype for something so early in development
 

SithLibrarian

New member
Mar 20, 2009
201
0
0
Unlike, say Halo or Call of Duty, GTA doesn't need an annual release. Long development cycles allow the Rockstar crew to take their time and develop a fine product.
 

Tron-tonian

New member
Mar 19, 2009
244
0
0
And here we see the problem with a purely market driven system...

So, Game X makes a bucketload of cash. Investors pony up and want a piece of the next one. The next game (Game X2!) makes even more. The investors, only seeing the almighty dollar, want the Game X3 produced faster, so they can get their hand son even more cash - completely forgetting that it was the time and care put into 1 and 2 that helped make them the successes they were.

Hopefully the investors are told to shove a sock in it and go back to counting their money. It's people like "Industry analyst Michael Pachter" who drive good series into the ground with their "just keep churning them out!" mentality.
 

Amnestic

High Priest of Haruhi
Aug 22, 2008
8,946
0
0
008Zulu said:
Its going to be; GTA5 Tommy Vercetti kicks ass in San Andreas.
Screw that tomfoolery. I want Rutherford Von Fisticuffington, Duke of Kent kicking ass in London.

Or Scousey McAnderson in Glasgow.

Having an entire GTA game of people with indecipherable Glaswegian accents would be awesome.
 

Carlston

New member
Apr 8, 2008
1,554
0
0
swaki said:
i know that videogames are a business first, then an source of entertainment and lastly an art form, but really, they want them to rush their games, keeping them on a strict cycle?.

does no one remember ET?!, it died for our sins.
I had ET...and it wasn't that hard. I not only beat it i found bugs in it...
the problem with et was the hint how to get out of a pit, well people didn't want a hint they just wanted it to be told to them. So if ET had a hint guide it would have been fine.
 

Carlston

New member
Apr 8, 2008
1,554
0
0
Reading the topic brought one thing to mind.
After the implosion of Duke Nukeum Forever.... I can see why they want a bit to chew at, but same time DNF gave fake screens and video all the time.
 

Nurb

Cynical bastard
Dec 9, 2008
3,078
0
0
-Giant corporate Publishers
-investors
-stock prices based on game sales

three major things that ruin games... rather than worrying over making a better GTA game than number 4, they are instead worrying about investors leaving because they're not talking about it enough.

These are early signs the franchise is going to continue it's downward slide... what's next? babysitting more relatives? maybe a gas gague, forcing us to leave a car or pull into a gas station to fill up, further squeezing out the whacky fun of GTAIII and vice city with more washed out colors and "gritty realism"? OH YAAAAY!
 

Darkong

New member
Nov 6, 2007
217
0
0
Somebody please kick this guy in the mouth.

Does he honestly think that the best way to go is to just flog GTA ever more rapidly? And if there's so little of it planned yet what sort of announcment can they make? Can they just go out and say 'We're planning GTA5'? I'm pretty sure any idiot can figure that out (though Pachter seems unable to it would appear.
 

Treblaine

New member
Jul 25, 2008
8,682
0
0
You could change the title from:

"GTA Silence Hurting Take-Two, Says Analyst"

to

"GTA Silence Hurting Take-Two, Says Drunken Hobo"

and it would have as much credibility.

See, these "analysis" have never actually made a business for themselves, they just sit on the sidelines making sweeping generalisation, broad assumptions and wild predictions and WE are the idiots for listening to them!

GTA *Could* dumb down for q shorter release cycle and *Could* increase their profits but they would burn out within a few years.

And Pachter has again shown his game-noob-ishness as he has completely forgotten about "Agent" the brand new IP begin developed by Rockstar Games - the same Rockstar that made GTA IV - as a PS3 exclusive.

Fuck the investors, they didn't get Rockstar where they are today. Rockstar, you keep doign what your are doing, you clealry know what you are doing, unlike Pachter who only thinks he has a clue what is going on.

I mean that guy has made SO MANY completely wrong predictions yet he gets away with it because he never puts his money where his mouth is. He would just invest in those places and keep quiet.
 

Treblaine

New member
Jul 25, 2008
8,682
0
0
Tron-tonian said:
And here we see the problem with a purely market driven system...

So, Game X makes a bucketload of cash. Investors pony up and want a piece of the next one. The next game (Game X2!) makes even more. The investors, only seeing the almighty dollar, want the Game X3 produced faster, so they can get their hand son even more cash - completely forgetting that it was the time and care put into 1 and 2 that helped make them the successes they were.

Hopefully the investors are told to shove a sock in it and go back to counting their money. It's people like "Industry analyst Michael Pachter" who drive good series into the ground with their "just keep churning them out!" mentality.
The market is fine, the market got us where we are today with the GTA franchise.

I'd say the entire problem is as you have mentioned these "snake oil salesmen" that call themselves "Analysts" that are screwing up the system with simplistic and self-serving generalisations.

Pachter just doesn't fucking well get games. He doesn't get the market and he doesn't have to, he is paid just to talk about the market and gets paid even if his predictions are wrong or his advice is poor.

It's like he is a virgin giving sex tips.
 

Tron-tonian

New member
Mar 19, 2009
244
0
0
Treblaine said:
The market is fine, the market got us where we are today with the GTA franchise.

I'd say the entire problem is as you have mentioned these "snake oil salesmen" that call themselves "Analysts" that are screwing up the system with simplistic and self-serving generalisations.

Pachter just doesn't fucking well get games. He doesn't get the market and he doesn't have to, he is paid just to talk about the market and gets paid even if his predictions are wrong or his advice is poor.

It's like he is a virgin giving sex tips.
But guys like Pachter *are* to a large degree, the market. Their job is to get the best return possible for investors. How do they do that? BY forcing companies to increase profit. How does a company do that? By laying people off, by cutting corners, and by running franchises into the ground by shipping shoddy work early.

He doesn't have to understand games - he just has to see his portfolio increase. That is his sole concern. It'd be no different were he talking about sneakers or frozen pizzas - cut corners, put out a sub-standard product, let me make more money. And if companies don't listen to him (or another stockholder with clout) then the board starts getting changed around until they have people who agree with that sort of vision.
 

Treblaine

New member
Jul 25, 2008
8,682
0
0
Tron-tonian said:
Treblaine said:
The market is fine, the market got us where we are today with the GTA franchise.

I'd say the entire problem is as you have mentioned these "snake oil salesmen" that call themselves "Analysts" that are screwing up the system with simplistic and self-serving generalisations.

Pachter just doesn't fucking well get games. He doesn't get the market and he doesn't have to, he is paid just to talk about the market and gets paid even if his predictions are wrong or his advice is poor.

It's like he is a virgin giving sex tips.
But guys like Pachter *are* to a large degree, the market. Their job is to get the best return possible for investors. How do they do that? BY forcing companies to increase profit. How does a company do that? By laying people off, by cutting corners, and by running franchises into the ground by shipping shoddy work early.

He doesn't have to understand games - he just has to see his portfolio increase. That is his sole concern. It'd be no different were he talking about sneakers or frozen pizzas - cut corners, put out a sub-standard product, let me make more money. And if companies don't listen to him (or another stockholder with clout) then the board starts getting changed around until they have people who agree with that sort of vision.
Wouldn't it be quicker and morally acceptable if they just embezzled all the money?

It is essentially the same thing.

THIS is why the workers in a company should be BY LAW paid not only by salary but by shares, it is such an incredible conflict on interest having third parties control the majority of shares, especially out of touch and feckless individuals who will gladly listen to any "so called expert" like Pachter and be easily led astray.
 

Amarok

New member
Dec 13, 2008
972
0
0
Carlston said:
swaki said:
i know that videogames are a business first, then an source of entertainment and lastly an art form, but really, they want them to rush their games, keeping them on a strict cycle?.

does no one remember ET?!, it died for our sins.
I had ET...and it wasn't that hard. I not only beat it i found bugs in it...
the problem with et was the hint how to get out of a pit, well people didn't want a hint they just wanted it to be told to them. So if ET had a hint guide it would have been fine.
Erm, he's not saying that ET was hard, he's saying that it sucked.
 

Carlston

New member
Apr 8, 2008
1,554
0
0
Amarok said:
Carlston said:
swaki said:
i know that videogames are a business first, then an source of entertainment and lastly an art form, but really, they want them to rush their games, keeping them on a strict cycle?.

does no one remember ET?!, it died for our sins.
I had ET...and it wasn't that hard. I not only beat it i found bugs in it...
the problem with et was the hint how to get out of a pit, well people didn't want a hint they just wanted it to be told to them. So if ET had a hint guide it would have been fine.
Erm, he's not saying that ET was hard, he's saying that it sucked.
Accually it was a big game for its time, ATARI people if it had more than 8 rooms it was "big" and if it made a figure more than a blue squard vs red triangle the graphic were wonderful.

Listening to morons saying atari sucked is like listening to a F-15 pilot go on about how the wright brothers plane sucks...yeah will it was the first and all people had.