The old and unwieldy GTA4 thread*

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well it would be kind of odd if these extra episodes aren't MS exclusive, even if they are getting their money back through sales. Would MS fund these just to get exclusive rights to distribute them through the internet and Sony could still sell them on Blu-ray. I doubt that...

I don't know what size is too big, but there are demos over 1GB so I'm quessing GTA add on pack could easily be more than that if necessary. Most likely it is located in the same city though so it might not need so much extra space.
 
I'm also sure sony must have had foward-looking contracts with them during the profitable ps2 period(vice city, san andreas). If they let this go, it probably was for a reason.
It's Take Two, R* owners, who have been in a serious financial down-spot. Regards Sony's position on this, R* have said they're ending the GTA franchise at IV and the next game they are working on is PS3 exclusive, so perhaps Sony did wrangle a deal, or didn't feel the need to as R* were their buddies anyway?
 
It's Take Two, R* owners, who have been in a serious financial down-spot. Regards Sony's position on this, R* have said they're ending the GTA franchise at IV and the next game they are working on is PS3 exclusive, so perhaps Sony did wrangle a deal, or didn't feel the need to as R* were their buddies anyway?

Are you saying this is the last gta?
 
I thought I read that in one of articles that announced their upcoming PS3 exclusive, but a quick Google hasn't found it. So this may not be the end of GTA. And of course Take Two could probably carry on with GTA with a different developer.
 
I thought I read that in one of articles that announced their upcoming PS3 exclusive, but a quick Google hasn't found it. So this may not be the end of GTA. And of course Take Two could probably carry on with GTA with a different developer.

I sure would like future sequels, with larger than San Andreas land masses, and even more radio, along with every in-door location accessible and destructible terrain and buildings. :LOL:
 
Maybe that's why Rockstar North are going PS3 exclusive next, they also want to make a game that big. ;)

It's obviously not going to be the actual end of GTA, but maybe the spiritual end. Franchises don't often do well when they aren't done by the "creators".
 
Wasn't there some blog about how Rockstar was Take Two or vice versa?

Surprised to hear about a separation.
 
Microsoft said at the breakfast that no other platform will get this DLC. It’s exclusive to them and to them only. From what was said, and Brian Crecente even questioned it, Playstation 3 won’t be getting any additional content for GTAIV. This could mean that they get it later or they get completely different content. We don’t know at this time.

Oh, yeah. That phrasing clears everything up...

Anyway, I think the most logical thing to expect from these DLC expansions are alternative narratives with new characters, but which take place in the same city. Maybe some new areas, weapons, vehicles and the like make sense, but I wouldn't get my hopes up for a whole new city. Maybe the most I could see is a change of era which reused a lot of the architecture from the original game, but gave you a story set in the 70s, for example.
 

By repeating what we allready "dont know" and speculating a bit more.

Microsoft said at the breakfast that no other platform will get this DLC. It’s exclusive to them and to them only. From what was said, and Brian Crecente even questioned it, Playstation 3 won’t be getting any additional content for GTAIV. This could mean that they get it later or they get completely different content. We don’t know at this time.

And when he is setting things straight it´s nice to see that he suggest that this "exclusive" content will be... timed exclusive..
 
setting the record straight, u mean its hard to keep a straight face reading that :p
eg
Microsoft paid $50 million for the content. If you haven’t been in a coma you should know that entire games have been developed for less than $50 million dollars. If you think that the $50 million is just for some new cars, characters and ice cream truck side missions, you are horribly mistaken
as has been said they loaned $50million ie rockstar have to pay the $50million back
 
as has been said they loaned $50million ie rockstar have to pay the $50million back

Interest free loan :)

EA just offered to buy take two for 2 billion cash, and were rejected.

Damm EA just stop buying up companies! They are just as bad as M$...

"We continue to believe that an acquisition of Take-Two by EA is in the best interests of your shareholders, employees and other constituents"

What about the best interest of gamers???
Imagine a GTA game every year... GTA 09: Revenge of Niko?
 
Sure, but that is really beside the point.

$50 million, whether loaned or paid, still points to some sort of major expansion pack.
huh, beside the point?
the article saiz
'Here are the facts:'
+ then lists something that is factually very wrong :)
which sorta invalidates the whole article somewhat.
perhaps sony or nintendo can trump MSs 50million dollars + give rockstar a billion dollars (+ in the small print say they have to pay it back)
imagine the same sites headlines,
a billion dollars!!!
whole games cost 50million dollars to develop (*)
sony/nintendo must have brought GTAIV/V/VI/VII

(*)though not as many as the article writer suspects, methinks <1%
btw on a related note, to date what is the most expensive game ever developed?
 
Sure, but that is really beside the point.

$50 million, whether loaned or paid, still points to some sort of major expansion pack.

That's the craziest deal I've ever heard! Going back to my original question - What does R* have to gain from this? $50m? No, because they have to pay that back! Surely there's more to it than this.

Otherwise, like zed pointed out, what's stopping everyone else coughing up 'loans' for whatever amount? Surely companies PAY for exclusives! At least that's what I thought...

Anyways, it's obvious they're being vague about the details on purpose. Personally, I don't think it's going to be $50m worth of content like the article suggests, simply because of the fact that MS isn't really paying for it. Plus making it DL only really limits their audience as well.
 
huh, beside the point?
the article saiz
'Here are the facts:'
+ then lists something that is factually very wrong :)
which sorta invalidates the whole article somewhat.

Well, that could esily boil down to a semantic argument. MS 'paid' $50million, which will be 'repaid' later.

I'm not defending the article, but maybe you're taking things a little too literally.

And regardless of the accuracy of the first statement, the conclusion made is sound. i.e. With that amount of money this is a major piece of content.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top