910°

Rockstar Reveals Why GTA V Didn't Get A Story Expansion, Reaffirms Commitment To Single-Player

Many campaign fans were disappointed when episodes from Los Santos never surfaced. Rockstar explains why.

Read Full Story >>
gameinformer.com
EazyC2413d ago

The closing statement gives me a certain sense of optimism:

"...for storytelling and a sense of immersion in a world, multiplayer games don’t rival single-player games"

Now, given that Red Dead Redemption was ALL about the immersion, I'd be a bit more hopeful that they don't go crazy with multiplayer this time. Plus, the setting/lack of commercialism doesn't lend itself to reams of DLC with trendy clothing and fancy cars. Could just be me being naive though.... here's hoping!

slate912413d ago

You didn't see the tie-dye cowboy hat and boots?!

sander97022413d ago

Yeah it really increases my hope that Red Dead Redemption 2 will be as good as the first one!

GUTZnPAPERCUTZ2413d ago

I agree, the only Issue I have with GTAV is that they stopped giving MP DLC to the SP files for about a year now. I dont expect everything to copy over, but Vehicles, Weapons, etc. should be added to BOTH

Glemt2413d ago

"As a company, we love single-player more than anything, and believe in it absolutely – for storytelling and a sense of immersion in a world, multiplayer games don’t rival single-player games."

No. Just no. I love SP, but if you loved it more than anything else you would have made it. You love the money GTA Online brings you more than anything else, otherwise we would have seen less of that and more of SP DLC.

unknownhero11232413d ago

Bingo! Corporate speak is meaningless without actions behind those words and R*'s actions proved otherwise. It's the sole reason why I'm not pre-ordering RDR2 which is a first from me as I usually pre-order anything R* churns out. Not saying I will boycott it mind you, I just want to see if I will get my money's worth. with the first red dead redemption, I sure did so I shall be judging by that metric.

EazyC2413d ago

To be fair, GTA V was still pretty gigantic by SP standards...I still feel like I got my money's worth despite not touching the online component. How no other stories were told in such a beautifully realised world was such a crying shame though.

I think it's a safe bet RDR 2's SP will be substantial. But I do agree that it should be a far greater focus than on V.

MrBeatdown2412d ago

Speaking of actions behind those words... their games have always delivered great single player.

I don't know why you think that's all changing because of no single player DLC for one game.

You seriously think they aren't working on a new GTA? Whether it's DLC for V or GTA6, more single player GTA is coming, and you'd be crazy to think they'll phone it in because GTA Online was a success.

MoonConquistador2412d ago

So you are inferring that you don't feel you got your money's worth from GTA V?

Rockstar appear to be one developer who gets the balance about right.

yeahokwhatever2413d ago

they could have at least let you buy the MP things in single player. but nooooooooooooo that would negatively impact shark card sales.

Chumdiddy2413d ago

This was going to be my exact reply. Thanks for doing it for everyone.

It's money. Anything else is a lie.

Rebel_Scum2413d ago

He sounded pretty reasonable to me. If you can't dedicate the resources to the project (without screwing up other projects) then its not really feasible (simple Project Management logic). The expansions GTAIV had, if they were to implement something similar in V would've taken almost the whole GTAV team to work on for sure.

If staff are already working on RDR2 then what he's saying makes sense. RDR2 has probably been in development for 4-5 years by now with a much smaller team working on the GTAV online component. I guess they didn't have the numbers and probably the Housers or whoever is high up didn't feel up to working on multiple projects at once.

You act like adding SP dlc is easy peasy when its far from the truth.

Glemt2412d ago

I never said SP DLC is easy-peasy, and never implied it to be. But if you claim you love doing SP more than anything else, but you do something else, it's clearly not because you love SP so much. So unless you're lying completely, you do it because the revenue of other projects is greater.
I don't contest these matters, and I don't think they should have done SP DLC (although I would have loved it, since I don't care for the MP parts that much), but the claims they make are simply not sound.

MrBeatdown2413d ago

GTA5 sold over 80 million units.

80 million.

You really think those stupid shark cards are selling so amazingly well that it's not worth it to Rockstar to develop single player content that like GTA4's expansions, could be sold as standalone games?

I've paid exactly $0 on shark cards. How much are you guys spending on them to make you think they're selling that well?

Phill-Spencer2413d ago (Edited 2413d ago )

In 2016 alone these stupid shark cards sold well enough to make more than 700 million dollars (700.000.000)in revenue!!!

https://segmentnext.com/201...

Unfortunately there are plenty of people who are willing to spend real money for ingame cash.

MrBeatdown2413d ago

That article says "GTA products", so it sounds like the main game which still sells for $40 to $60 is included in that figure.

"Net Revenues from GTA products exceeded $700 million over the past 12 months"

Glemt2412d ago

I'm not spending anything on them. I have a couple of cousins that play GTA Online weekly, and it's pretty much the only game they play really, and each of them spend at least 200 dollars in the last years, one of them said he probably came close to 500 dollars.

Just check the figures below. Online sales in GTA are booming. Sure, it's not the only thing R* sells, and they definitely would make money on SP DLC and new games, even new IPs I bet, but I do believe GTA Online has brings the most profit. The Shark Cards are said to be nearly 100% profit..

" Digitally-delivered net revenue grew 56% to $268.2 million, as compared to $172.1 million in last year’s fiscal first quarter. Recurrent consumer spending (virtual currency, downloadable add-on content and microtransactions) grew 72% year-over-year and accounted for 63% of digitally-delivered net revenue, or 41% of total net revenue. The largest contributors to digitally-delivered net revenue in fiscal first quarter 2018 were Grand Theft Auto Online and Grand Theft Auto V, NBA 2K17, and WWE SuperCard and WWE 2K17. "

http://www.businesswire.com...

Rebel_Scum2412d ago

They're creating a whole new SP game from the ground up (RDR2) instead of making SP DLC for a last gen game. How does that go against their claim that you quoted in your first post?

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 2412d ago
2413d ago
Psychotica2413d ago

I find it amazing that after all the work they must have put in creating that three protagonist system that they just abandon it. What a waste of potential..

sloth33952413d ago

I would have rather had one protagonist the story could have been better then

MrBeatdown2412d ago

There is no wasted potential.

They'll probably make another GTA. The last one did okay enough to warrant a sequel.

MoonConquistador2412d ago

What gives you the impression they have abandoned it. Not everything that worked well in one game works in others.

I liked the focus on one character (OK two if you include the ending) in RDR, but thought the three protagonists in GTA V also worked for telling that story though I never built up the same connection with John Marston. (Hunting animals in the wild on your own for a few weeks would do that).

kevinsheeks2413d ago (Edited 2413d ago )

just say money, don't sit here and treat your audience like idiots . .hell we can look back at articles with some of the voice actors you had them come in and when you saw how big mp got you cancelled them out . .and now you must have a new product coming and you want to bs us so we purchase your product.

lmao I'm sorry I didn't actually read the article I should have the gall of these people

"The good news for story fans? Rockstar not having the bandwidth for an expanded story campaign in GTA V doesn't mean no Rockstar games will have them going forward. "We would love to do more single-player add-ons for games in the future,"

sooo basically "nah no gtv v sp expansions but we promise on the next product ;)"

but with that recent article of mass effect 3 micro cards getting upwards of 16k purchases . .this is going to be a nasty period of gaming

Show all comments (58)
90°

Every PlayStation Studios game available now on Windows PC

Windows Central writes: "Many PlayStation Studios games that are ported to PC get dedicated PS5 DualSense support, which allows users to experience haptic feedback and adaptive trigger support without actually having to own a PS5.

According to Hermen Hulst, head of PlayStation Studios, it's still the company's intent to launch the bigger single-player games on PS5 first, before later bringing the games to PC. This might not be the case for multiplayer games however, which are considered okay to launch simultaneously on console and PC."

Read Full Story >>
windowscentral.com
ocelot0722h ago

My guess is after god of war. Probably last of us 2 that's a almost 4 year old game now and by the time it's released on pc it will be more than 4 years old or close to 5.

Elda16h ago

Every old Playstation game that is now on PC.

shinoff21836h ago

Right. I definitely see what a headlined from a website named windows central was trying to do though. It's cute little wordplay to help out the green box

Flewid6385h ago

Are PlayStation games no longer good or worth playing once they are old?

Elda4h ago

I'm guessing my comment went over your head.

XiNatsuDragnel14h ago

Good at least they can sell hardware

220°

Former Activision studio Toys for Bob partners with Xbox to publish its first game as an indie

Former Activision studio Toys for Bob partners with Xbox to publish its first game as an indie. This is something of a homecoming, as Microsoft owns Activision.

Read Full Story >>
engadget.com
Obscure_Observer1d 8h ago

Very very early in development. Still, fantastic news!

Let´s GO!!!

Lightning771d 6h ago

I guess.

How come they didnt either let them go or sell Tango and others to another publisher? Not saying Ubisoft, EA would be any better. (Capcome would of treated them right )

At least it wouldn't be MS of all ppl destroying them.

MS really should let go Tango go like they did TFB here.

darthv721d 6h ago (Edited 1d 6h ago )

one was under Bethesda (Tango) the other under Activision (TFB). Clearly each one handled the separations of their subordinates differently.

Obscure_Observer1d 5h ago (Edited 1d 5h ago )

"How come they didnt either let them go or sell Tango and others to another publisher? Not saying Ubisoft, EA would be any better. (Capcome would of treated them right )"

Perhaps because Zenimax and ABK handles such matters differently based on their own internal policies as "independent" publishers.

Whoever, chances are it´s simply because MS didn´t wanted Tango or Austin to be acquired by competitors and develop new bangers for them, giving MS a bad rep in a possible future. Which could also be the reason why they ensured an exclusive partnership with TFB and its new game, before anyone else.

Sad and disgusting. But it is what it is.

Lightning771d 2h ago (Edited 1d 2h ago )

"Whoever, chances are it´s simply because MS didn´t wanted Tango or Austin to be acquired by competitors and develop new bangers for them, giving MS a bad rep in a possible future."

MS has a bad rep now because those studios are no more. I rather them sell the studio continue to make multiplatform releases, while MS continues to focus on whatever they're doing. If they didn't want Tango around they should separated from them or sell them to, like they did TFB.

It's inexcusable, they have options on how to handle studios they don't want anymore with killing jobs. Not just MS but the rest of the industry also.

Sad and disgusting sure how many will get shut down next year or this year even?

I don't trust MS decisions and motivations at this point. You have to admit they make one dumb move after another.

Obscure_Observer18h ago(Edited 18h ago)

"MS has a bad rep now because those studios are no more. I rather them sell the studio continue to make multiplatform releases, while MS continues to focus on whatever they're doing. If they didn't want Tango around they should separated from them or sell them to, like they did TFB."

Imo, MS separated from TFB because they didn´t had a game associated with Xbox yet, unlike Tango.

"I don't trust MS decisions and motivations at this point. You have to admit they make one dumb move after another."

Fair enough. It was indeed an epic dumb move from them to close Tango.

Still, all to be forgotten, like always have. This is not the first time a big publisher shuts down a beloved and/or successful studio out of nowhere and certainly won´t be the last. Do you remember Lionhead? Do you remember Evolution Studios? Yeah... both were beloved studios and yet, those companies kill those studios in q blink of an eye and got away with it.

anast16h ago(Edited 16h ago)

The studio boss made some money from this transaction. Once the game releases, the studio will get chopped up.

-Foxtrot1d 8h ago

Manages to buy their freedom especially after all the shit Microsoft has been doing with its studios lately

...

Goes right back to them as partners.

Okaaaaaay...

darthv721d 6h ago

Id venture a guess that TFB working directly with MS was a better outcome than working through Activision to get to MS.

VersusDMC1d 4h ago

From the article...

"Toys for Bob spun out as an indie back in February after Microsoft instituted sweeping layoffs that impacted 86 employees, which was more than half of the staff"

I doubt those 86 employees enjoyed the Microsoft experience over Activisions.

Inverno1d 4h ago

MS shuts down studios because of lack of resources and then helps these guys by giving em resources. Also MS is what forced them to buy their freedom in the first place? What kind of logic 😂

Chevalier1d ago

The best thing is that the company that is worth $3 trillion and owns the company instead of Xbox lacks resources. How the hell does a company worth $3 trillion making a measly $70 billion purchase they 'can't' support. Lol

BlindMango7h ago

The reason they would need to "partner with Microsoft" is simply to make a game that's part of a franchise that Microsoft owns. Meaning they're probably going to make a new Spyro game - they're still an independent studio, but are making a game in a franchise that Microsoft owns. It's kind of like Remedy partnering with Rockstar to be able to make the Max Payne remakes.

shinoff21836h ago

It was probably the deal to get released from Ms

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 6h ago
Sciurus_vulgaris1d 6h ago (Edited 1d 6h ago )

Xbox’s gaming division seems to still function as 3 semi-autonomous sub-divisions, Xbox Studios, Bethesda and ABK. The three main sub-divisions can seemingly shut down or build studios and set up partnerships independently. This would explain why Bethesda can recently shutdown studios, while ABK spins off one studio, while building a new one. Plus, Toys for Bob could be spun off by ABK, only to immediately re-partner with Microsoft.

Chevalier1d ago

That's absolutely 💯 BS. Any sane 'autonomous' company would NOT put their games on Gamepass day 1 like COD will lose probably billions.

Also they're all under Xbox game studios so any autonomy is an illusion.

PhillyDonJawn12h ago

No, I'm sure MS can and does step in when they want something done specifically but I'm also sure they let them also work independently

shinoff21836h ago

I highly highly doubt this. Ms controls all. The guys aren't gonna be allowed to just shut something down like that without approval. No way

Elda1d 1h ago

Either a kiddie game or something uninteresting.

Obscure_Observer18h ago

Don´t worry. You won´t be playing it anyway since their next game will possible be a next gen Xbox console game.

Elda17h ago(Edited 17h ago)

Don't worry about my comments.

PhillyDonJawn12h ago

Right probably something like astrobot

romulus2312h ago

Nah he said "uninteresting", lots of people are interested in Astro Bot.

Elda10h ago

Never Astro Bot. Astro Bot looks better than any exclusive released on XB this entire generation & believe there hasn't been much.

Asplundh9h ago

Crash 4 was good, so I'm hopeful.

PhillyDonJawn8h ago

Hey you said that about SOT and looks like many ppl on PS is playing it. You also found bugsnax interesting ffs your opinion hold no weight lol.

Elda7h ago(Edited 7h ago)

Bugsnax is BS, tried it & quickly deleted it. It's a game that fits right on Gamepass. PS5 owners that are probably playing the boring SOT you could count on one hand. LMAO!!...don't try to come for me.

PhillyDonJawn5h ago

So you admit bugsnax interested you enough to try? 😂 someone gotta call you out on the foolishness.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 5h ago
Show all comments (35)
200°

Sony shares big new PS Plus stat, but not the one we want to see

PlayStation Plus has improved the split of PS4 and PS5 players on its priciest tiers, but Sony continues to hide total subscriber numbers.

Read Full Story >>
theloadout.com
mandf1d 11h ago

lol acting like it’s equivalent to ms numbers

Mr Logic1d 11h ago

Uh...They're definitely not equivalent.

"Microsoft’s Xbox Game Pass service now has 34 million subscribers."

"the total number of PS Plus subscribers across all tiers was 47.4 million"

darthv721d 11h ago (Edited 1d 11h ago )

That PSN number seems like it should be much higher... especially when you consider that PS4 alone has a sell through of over 117m. To not even be at least half that is rather interesting.

To the XB side, having 34m to an install base of roughly 50m (XBO sell through) or even 85m (360 sell through) is a greater percentage of unit to member ratio than PSN.

bloop1d 7h ago

That's not the "gotcha" you think it is Darth.

darthv721d 6h ago

^^it's not supposed to be bloop.... it's just an interesting observation.

Einhander19721d 5h ago

darthv72

"That PSN number seems like it should be much higher... especially when you consider that PS4 alone has a sell through of over 117m. To not even be at least half that is rather interesting.

To the XB side, having 34m to an install base of roughly 50m (XBO sell through) or even 85m (360 sell through) is a greater percentage of unit to member ratio than PSN."

Have you ever heard of a PC before? I hear they are pretty popular.

fr0sty23h ago

MS started lumping gold subscribers in with those GP numbers... keep in mind.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 23h ago
shinoff21831d 10h ago (Edited 1d 10h ago )

What. Definitely more os plus subscribers but that makes sense due to actual console sales

Darth the difference between the bases are huge your right but you gotta think. Ps players buy more games, where as the Xbox base relies on gamepass for their gaming. So it makes perfect sense

darthv721d 10h ago (Edited 1d 10h ago )

What makes perfect sense though? You say PS players buy more games... so then logically there should be more PS+ subscribers given the increased number of online multiplayer games in the PS4 generation alone. The PS4 was the first time that + was required for online play much like Gold was for 360 users.

Keep in mind we are talking subscribers, not simply XB/PS users. I assume you meant to say offline single player games, which is most likely true as well. That gen also saw a significant increase in games with an online component comparted to the previous gen.

victorMaje1d 9h ago

I for one will be going back to essential at the next renewal. When I feel a game is good & right up my alley, I’ll check trusted reviews & just buy it.

jznrpg1d 8h ago (Edited 1d 8h ago )

I have the top tier until 2028 as they gave me a massive discount for all the years I had left but I’ll most likely go to essential as well. I buy my games but my kids do use the service occasionally. They do prefer to own their games as well since any game can leave the rental service at some point and they don’t like that idea. They mostly use it to demo games then ask me to buy games if they really like it.

RedDevils1d 4h ago

For me, I will cancel it all together but unfortunately I still have it till 2030 lol

meganick1d 8h ago

I would like to see Sony add a fourth tier of PS Plus for people who just want to be able to play games online without any of the perks like monthly games, store discounts, or anything like that, and it should cost $20 annually, $30 maximum. There’s no way I’m paying $80 just to play games online. Even the original $60 fee was too much, and I would often wait for sales to re-up my subscription.

P_Bomb1d 4h ago (Edited 1d 4h ago )

Essential is too expensive, I agree. We’ve got one Essential and one Premium sub. Dropping the Premium when it expires.

gamerz1d ago

Just let my subscription lapse for the first time since 2010. Will sub again every now and then for a month or so to access my old ps+ games but for me it's the end of an era.

DivineHand1251d ago

Let those numbers continue to drop because it is now too expensive. $80 per year just to play online. I noticed they didn't offer any discounts on the subscription or controllers during this year's days of play for the first time in many years and they will feel it when people choose not to renew.

My subscription will lapse next month and it will stay that way until further notice.

KevtheDuff20h ago

There were savings on subs and controllers here in the UK? I bought a controller yesterday in the sale..
It would be weird if those deals were not in other territories too?