Take-Two Says Frequent GTA Releases Would "Degrade" Franchise
- Thread starter StewShearerOld
- Start date
I completely hated GTA 4. I thought it was terrible in nearly every facet (the PC port was awful at launch) and that game alone basically ended any enthusiasm I had for the series. In fact, come to think of it, I haven't played a single "open world big city" game since then. Saints row, sleeping dogs, etc. None of them have even remotely appealed to me since GTA 4.
Maybe I also just kind of grew up and my tastes changed, I dunno.
Maybe I also just kind of grew up and my tastes changed, I dunno.
Thank you Take Two. Yearly releases are why I gave up on CoD, AC, and Guitar Hero. A year is just not enough time to truly innovate a franchise and in all three cases I listed, stagnation becomes a major problem. In fact the only game in any of those franchises that seemed to innovate was AC3, but it was so bloated and misguided that game suffered severe issues as a result.
even when i gave up on this franchise since san andreas, its good to hear that at least some publishers do the right thing and take their time instead rushing things out the door.
I respect prolonging development time to avoid shipping a product that's not ready, but to his speech, I have to say that the only time we've waited more than two years to get a GTA game was when the shittiest of them was made. All the way up to San Andreas (where I've always found each game to be more brilliant than the last), the development time was never over two years (barring a month maybe).
So no, frequent GTA games would not cheapen the franchise, crappy games would and have.
So no, frequent GTA games would not cheapen the franchise, crappy games would and have.
Im happy to read this statement.
I already had a deposit of 40 euros down on GTAV with gamestop when they announced the delay (i was dropping in a tenner a week) and i was actually fine with it, my money is still there and they are taking an extra few months to get the game right. Main Reason im cool with it is because i trust the brand, i trust the franchise, and i know that im going to get a very good product at the end of it.
unlike Aliens colonial marines *Cough*
I already had a deposit of 40 euros down on GTAV with gamestop when they announced the delay (i was dropping in a tenner a week) and i was actually fine with it, my money is still there and they are taking an extra few months to get the game right. Main Reason im cool with it is because i trust the brand, i trust the franchise, and i know that im going to get a very good product at the end of it.
unlike Aliens colonial marines *Cough*
I have the same sentiment. Taking the time for a proper new iteration gives a developer the breathing space to actually find out what the audience would like and building something that fits those qualities.lancar said:
When looking at yearly releases, I wouldn't compare it with the cases of games like Call of Duty and Rock Band, which were just built on developers/publishers milking a profitable franchise (not laudable, but at the very least understandable). But even a celebrated franchise like Assassin's Creed hasn't been able to maintain the same level of quality over all its games with its yearly releases. No, I applaud Take Two for this.
Yeah I'm with everyone else on this.
Videogames are not movies or TV shows, you don't just pump out another "blockbuster" to sell, you craft videogames carefully.
Cause even with long amounts of development time, videogames can end up bad.
Can't wait for the corporate apologists to show up with their "economically viable" arguments.
Videogames are not movies or TV shows, you don't just pump out another "blockbuster" to sell, you craft videogames carefully.
Cause even with long amounts of development time, videogames can end up bad.
Can't wait for the corporate apologists to show up with their "economically viable" arguments.
This is not actually the core of the issue. A game can objectively be good even if the development time is short. The problem is being fed up with the game. I love Assassin's Creed. But I find myself unable to enjoy it for a very long time. I just finish the story and I'm done with the game because I know the next one will be out soon. On consoles this leads to people selling their games and then publishers and developers are whining about used sales. On PC it leads to waiting for discount sales. Perhaps if they let us crave for the next installment like Rockstar, Bethesda and Valve, we would treasure these games and play them for years after they've been released.Lovely Mixture said:
And of course there is the quality factor that you mentioned.
Oh course, but it's the issue I focus on when frequent releases come into the picture.Adam Jensen said:
I don't think this is the core of the issue either though (but still a one of them).Adam Jensen said:
People I know will play a game if it looks fun, and continue to play it after finishing if it still remains fun to them. I think some people wait for used sales and discounts regardless of the game series being involved.
Im very glad this is one of the few companies that still realize that it is better to release less but high quality than a ot of the same, even if there are enough idiots that keep buying the same stuff over and over and over and over again, like all those sports games.
Frankly I'm not complaining about the long space between releases. My friends and I still get a lot of fun out of GTA IV. They're good games, well polished with a long life. If it takes a long time between releases to maintain that then we can't really complain.
You know, we used to call these "patches" on PC, until they were replaced by DLC and finally whole new installments.CrazyBlaze said:
FEichinger said:
God I'm depressed now. Not because I miss that era so much, but because I now realize how monetization has crushed my interest most videogames nowadays.
I don't blame you though.