I’d pay over $100 for GTA6 personally. And microtransactions aren’t out of the question for me either. I don’t have nearly as much time as money these days. Not that I have a lot of money, but I’ll pay it if it makes the experience better
I don’t know why but I couldn’t give two shits about GTA6, maybe I’m just burned out on AAA games
Because it will be full of micro transactions and bullshit content no-one asked for, with anti cheat horseshit that will pretty much be a virus on your computer.
Sad thing is that it’ll still sell millions because most people don’t even know when they are being served shit.
Im completelly opposide. Its maybe only AAA game im intrested in long time.
Mostly because of their track record. I have been playing GTA since the very first top down game and every main game in the series has pushed the games further.
Thinking how big leaps every game has done, i cant wait to see what kind of the beast 6 is going to be.
I’m the same but I may just be getting older. Last game I was hyped for was Cyberpunk 2077 coming off of the stellar Witcher 3 and having followed both games I loved, W1 & W2. Sometime before it released, I just dropped all hype for it and haven’t felt the same after. Haven’t even played it yet either.
Today, I let myself be pleasantly surprised by games I never thought I’d like. I really liked Death Stranding and I’m waiting for its sequel but still no hype… I haven’t even seen the trailer yet and I doubt I will… I’ll buy it and go in blindly. Just have a PS for Sony’s once a year AAA and that’s it for AAA gaming. Most other days, its just AA or indie games on PC… which is where I find a lot more flavor. As an example, this month, I’ve played Minami Lane, MudRunner and Art of Rally and starting Tactical Breach Wizards soon.
maybe I’m just burned out on AAA games
I know I am.
Companies need to grow a spine. Good games sell regardless of what’s out. If your confidence in your own game is so low that you’d push it to a slow release date, it’s probably not worth playing anyway.
I don’t know about that one. Games are expensive these days and if your game releases anywhere near the rumored $100 GTA 6, a LOT of people are going to have to choose one or the other, and it’s very unlikely that in most cases they don’t choose GTA6, literally the most anticipated video game of the last decade. Sure you can always buy the smaller game later, but a huge part of the sales of video games is the opening week, when all the hype around it has had time to come to a head, and you’re influenced by the fact that lots of other people are playing it.
Yeah good games will always sell SOME copies. But if you thinking that a game even releasing in the same month as GTA6 won’t have a permanent impact on that games sales, you’re smoking the reefer.
I think what you’re saying is true but perhaps you’re both talking about different things. I think you’re speaking about the reality of the situation whereas the comment OP is talking about the risk averse nature of large game studios. I don’t think it’s the same thing.
Also, I think I’m part of a growing minority but if gta 6 reviews are bad I’m not buying it until I hear it’s been fixed. I’ve been burned so many times 😭
I know I am buying it once the price goes down considerably. Wasn’t it rumoured to start with 3 digits? I’m a patient gamer.
It’s the exact same thing actually. Their claim was:
Good games will sell regardless of what’s out
But that’s just not true, and game studios of all sizes know that. The risk aversion of these companies exist because of the reality of the situation.
It also has nothing to do with a studios confidence in their game. The quality of a game is light years away from being the sole objective indicator of a games sales. The Outer Wilds is objectively one of the greatest games ever made and has no real peers in what it does. And yet it didn’t make nearly the sales numbers as the latest asset flipped Call of Duty game.
Fair enough - I stand corrected
You cant trust reviews. For example dragon’s dogma 2 which i just picked up is a great game. But some people wouldn’t know it based a lot of criticism and bad reviews it recieved when it launched.
Ehh yeah that’s a whole other can of worms. By “reviews”, for me, I mean a bunch of different sources.
And I do that because you’re correct! Trust in those is low.
So “reviews” maybe isn’t the right word. Just tryna keep the comment simple.
that’s not true. games can absolutely get fucked by release dates coinciding with big names. and have.
This is so strange. Wasn’t it not long ago that studios were crowding into very specific release windows ( usually november iirc ) so they could maximize initial sales? Maybe the digital release era has changed things. I mean, I get it if your game was in the same niche or smth, but “companies might tank” seems a little much.
Either way, if this is true, eoy 2025 is in for a dry spell when it comes to new games.
Edit: Also I find it hilarious how all these “industry analysts” keep popping up suggesting ominous things despite Rockstar not saying a peep about the game besides the trailer. Almost as if they were paid to do it.
They aren’t crowding into those windows because competition helps their sales, it’s because they expect the biggest shopping period of the year will result in more sales than they lose. And there’s a reason only the biggest titles release in these windows.
Capcom made the decision years ago to release in February/March because they know a November window will drown them.
Over time they realised that, while holiday windows or whatever have high sales, if there’s a better or more popular game coming out then, yours will just be forgotten.
That said, most “industry specialists” are just glorified influencers, so take it with a grain of salt
Sure is a great way to stir the pot, that’s for sure. This article raised my eyebrow so much I just had to share it.
I’m not quite sure why they’re so concerned. I suspect they’re actually not and this is just things “analysts” say.
I suspect that the release of GTA VI is going to be lukewarm compared to the release of GTA V, because everyone remembered what Rockstar did to GTA V. People are going to wait around and see how they handle GTA online because they need to do better than last time because last time was ridiculous.
I’m certainly not all that interested in getting it day one and I know a lot of other people aren’t either.
GTA5 is more than a decade ago,.
The older gemers may remember but there is a whole generation that has spung up since.
Edit: a quick look shows there were 1.7 billion people born between 1995 and 2007 i.e. born in the period that would have trurned 18 between 2013 and 2025… This corresponds to 20% of the global population.
Nice of you to assume there are no underage players of GTA V
born between 1995 and 2007 i.e. born in the period that would have trurned 18 between 2013 and 2015
I don’t know. Gamers have very short memory and are driven by FOMO and social media coverage.
Just look at the whole Cyberpunk situation. Or, more recently, the Sparking Zero drama. Everyone pre-ordered the 120$ edition to play earlier, just because of shiny graphics ™️. Then, when the honey moon phase was over, the subreddit turned into a shithole full of frustration and complaints. The playercount numbers dropped. All you can see now is reports of bugs, glitches and so on. But still, most of these folks are already considering the purchase of SZ2, cause they are sure
devs will definitely fix the issues.Just watch GTA 6 pre-orders skyrocket as soon as Rockstar drops the 2nd trailer, next year.
There’s absolutely zero reason to pre-order the bonuses you get are never worth it and it’s not like they’re going to run out. Hell I didn’t pre-order GTA V and I got it day one on both PS3 and Xbox 360 but just walking into a store on lunch time. And that was a physical media now everything’s gone digital is even less reason to pre-order.
So I’ll not be pre-ordering regardless, but I wouldn’t be pre-ordering anyway because I don’t trust Rockstar anymore. I’m not saying that the game will be bad I’m just saying I don’t trust Rockstar fully anymore. I also don’t trust CDPR anymore because of cyberpunk. Yeah they fixed it but so what, I don’t want to be encouraging that kind of release strategy. Same thing with hello games, If they want people to go back to buying their games by default, these companies have to release some whoppers with zero issues day one to get back their reputation.
I totally agree with you. I’m not pre-ordering either, not in 2025. But we are just a vocal minority, after all.
Judging by all the shark card crap they jammed into the last GTA, I fully expect them to shovel a bunch of crap in to make more money: $70 base games, deluxe editions, DLC, micro transactions, social club integration, required internet connections, all of it.
I miss the old GTAs before they got greedy.
As an optimist, I expect more expansions like Gay Tony and for them to simply make fun of microtransactions on the radio.
Ah, full expansion DLC. That’d be nice.
Take your console exclusive bullshit and shove it up your ass. I’ll play it when it’s on PC. And only on PC.
I’ll go a step further and say only when it’s been vetted and discounted on PC.
This will probably be the last time it ever happens. They’re trying to get people to double dip, and plenty will, but the console install base isn’t what it was when GTA V came out at the end of a generation. Plus we all know full well that the PC version will happen, whereas in yesteryear, we weren’t sure.
the console install base isn’t what it was when GTA V came out at the end of a generation.
I had a look to check the figures.
From the PlayStation perspective February 2025 estimates put the PS5 at 74.9m, while January 2013 estimates put the PS3 at 77m.
However Xbox is really letting their numbers lag with 28.3m Series consoles sold by September 2024 vs 77.2m 360 consoles by April 2013.
If we were just talking PlayStation I would say 97% is near enough to make no difference but if we compare both platforms together its only 67% and that is enough to influence strategy. A console only release in 2025 is unlikely to eclipse GTA5’s position as “fastest-selling entertainment product in history”.
But also don’t forget that the amount of gamers is larger today than in 2013. Gaming is much more mainstream, and so even 97% of the install base is still disappointing considering steam grew by, what, 3x or something in terms of average monthly users?
Another source I found is that the amount of total gamers grew by roughly 50% from 2013 to 2025. But yeah, I just did a quick skin numbers are not precise
But still, 97% is disappointing considering the general demographic was supposed to grow. And then, in reality, it’s just 67% too
Yeah that’s a good point.
If gaming grew and the total userbase is the same now, then it’s smaller by percentage.
That must been that PC is just exploding in popularity over the time period in question.
A game like GTA is likely to drive console sales, but not enough to make up that deficit.
And only on PC
That’s going to be a long wait my friend.
I’d rather wait than buy a console for a single game that will barely hit 720p/30.
I think they mean it will never be PC only, so it’d be an infinite wait. Or maybe some future release version will be console only.
Also, “720p/30” lol
It’s been the same for… ~25 years, since at least GTA3.
You can still play them on both console and PC and not only PC.
I got nothing but time
K. You do that.
K
I just don’t have the patience to wait even more. I have a PS5, so why wouldn’t I play it on release??
Because I don’t want console level performance when I play it for the first time
Because of backlogs and eventual price drops /sales
Why would you want to pay $70 for a pay to win game at all?
There’s a single player game people are pretty jazzed about, too.
Huh? For £70 I’m getting -
- Huge open world
- Very fun and emergent gameplay
- Likely a world with multiple competing systems and subsystems to play with
- Incredibly detailed world to get lost and immersed in
- Given the RDR2 writing, likely a really well written story
But you’ve decided to latch onto one aspect of the previous game (the Online mode) to try to be as contrarian as possible?
I sure as heck will pay £70 for the above. And so will many millions of others. Sorry if that does a poo on your hate-train.
Dude thats crazy. I havent paod full price for a game in years, have a little patience and you can get a bunch more games for that much.
Games are always on sale.
Good for you! For GTA VI, I definitely wanna play it as quickly as possible and £70 is a pretty reasonable price for that.
Why the rush?
I’m with you on not paying full price in general, but they answered your main question before and you didnt acknowledge it.
Well, to be fair, you don’t know you’re getting it for that. As far as I’ve seen, they haven’t announced the release price yet. And a lot of studios are hoping that Rockstar will take the fall for being the first $100 game so publishers can start charging used console prices for AAA games from then on.
Either way though, I won’t be paying anything for it.
Huh? For £70 I’m getting
Based on what? You don’t actually know until it gets released. Sure, past history and reputation are certainly things to factor in, but we’ve seen plenty of major gaming companies shit the bed, despite their reputations.
Wait until it launches and the reviews come in.
I’m responding to a comment assuming it’ll be nothing but a “pay to win” game, despite any real evidence of that - I’m pointing out the expectations of GTA VI.
This sub is like Reddit on steroids. Just a bunch of contrarian kids trying to start arguments on the internet. Bizarre.
I don’t see any horse balls physics in your list.
Utterly unplayable.
You hope you’ll get those things. It’s Rockstar though so who really knows. I mean we do know we’re going to get a single player that’s been confirmed by Rockstar but everything else is just a guess. The map leak people seem to suggest that the map will include NASA and Disneyland which will be cool I guess, but we don’t know that that’s just a prediction and I don’t quite understand how they can predict that.
I just don’t trust Rockstar not to screw it up with GTA online 2, now with more irritating flying bikes
Or $100 ,as some people are predicting
controversial take, but I hope they do delay it. Better a good game late than a bad game early. As big as this release is, it HAS to be good.
Yeah, the Witcher 3 release should have taught the game publishers this. CDPR delayed the launch by several months because the game wasn’t ready to ship yet. And the game was phenomenal, and received rave reviews pretty much across the board. Gamers were disappointed about the launch, but basically went “this game will be worth the wait.”
Funny how CDPR themselves then had a major fuck up with Cyberpunk
…and they followed it with Cyberpunk 2077’s disastrous launch but ultimate success. So I wouldn’t hold CDPR as a high standard.
I’d argue that is just another example of why delaying games isn’t a bad thing. 2077 clearly wasn’t ready at launch, and would have benefitted from a delayed launch.
I feel like that one was also due to awful development practices, they had the whole scrapping the entire first 2 years of work thing due to a control freak lead dev who was ultimately releaved of his position (though not until after release iirc)
I wouldn’t call it a success yet. I just started playing it for the first time yesterday and I have already fallen through the floor twice and the camera was broken causing seizure inducing visuals in one of the cutscenes.
It’s right there in the link. It sold more than Witcher 3, even though it did the wrong thing by releasing early and buggy.
You realize that rockstar basically invented this strategy right? Almost every release since vice city or San Andreas has been delayed by 6 months to a year to be the best game possible.
I just assumed game companies had been doing that since the 1800’s.
Sure you can argue standard practice has been and should be to deliver a finished game first and foremost. But in the context of modern gaming and setting release dates, Rockstar has historically been unafraid to change a release date to make a better game. But yes before the internet and the ability to patch a game it was standard to make sure your game didn’t suck before letting it loose.
And my comment was more to point out that using CDPR as a shining beacon of consistently solid game releases is laughable, especially when comparing them to Rockstar.
big games get delayed, a lot
And yet so many of them still suck at launch.
That’s cause the business side keeps pushing for increasingly unrealistic deadlines and will only accept delaying so much before forcing it out.
Weird vibes in this comment section.
They are all from players who are against things Rockstar did with GTA and what it represents for the industry. But they are not representative of the whole market.
The article is right about the impact for small studios. On the timeline for the game I’m working on, we have a prediction for GTA VI release with a big question mark and we hope to avoid it.
The problem is not that all players will spend $100 on the game. The problem is that the majority of the press coverage, Steam traffic, streamer time, etc. will focus on the topic. Even if there is bad press around GTA, that’s still attention that is not on other games.
Exactly this. I work in the games industry as well and even big studios are falling over themselves NOT to release anywhere near GTA6.
Nobody believes there won’t be people playing other games at that time. But it’s going to dominate the media cycle for a month, especially if it is either better or worse than fans hope. And the reality is that many, many people have limited gaming budgets. If you’ve only got $100 to spend, GTA6 is very likely to be the default pick at that time.
It’s a behemoth in terms of grabbing attention from both the media and players. All the best laid plans for a successful release can be completely derailed by a game like GTA6.
I really didn’t know what to expect with this article. That being said, the industry holding their breath on GTA 6 is a bit much, to say the least.
Wait, do people still get excited for GTA? I thought GTA V online killed a lot of goodwill for the series.
Are you seriously questioning whether there is any hype for GTA?
GTAV Online may have hindered Rockstar’s goodwill for fans of the single player mode, but the Online mode rakes in cash.
RDR2 released in 2018 and is widely considered one of the best single player games with one of the best open worlds, strongly signalling to fans that Rockstar hasn’t lost its mojo.
GTA VI is, unquestionably, the most anticipated game of the year. To suggest otherwise is to be insanely disingenuous on your part.
The main writers have since left Rockstar. Dan Houser left in 2020. I feel GTA will lose it’s charm with this next entry, I hope I am wrong, but something just feels off. Either way, won’t be buying it until it’s on a good sale, reviews dependent too.
They lost Lazlow… There goes the greatest radio DJ to ever grace the gta airwaves.
When they added purchasable clubs into online and you could get Lazlow to come to your club, I made it my entire goal to make him happy, I spent so much cash keeping him dancing, always made me sad seeing him sitting there alone as the reality of it all hit him.
It’s certainly going to be interesting how this game is received. Rockstar is one of those studios that burns all its goodwill with things like Online, the “Definitive” editions, RDR2 Online closing early, yet despite that it’s the largest studio with one of the largest, most successful franchises.
With the industry being so dire right now, where only huge behemoths like rockstar, or tiny efficient indie studios, can really compete, the outcome of GTA 6 might be quite consequential for the industry.
All they ever did was riff on popular (crime) movies, and they were already scraping the bottom of the bin on that with 5. What popular movies in recent times has 6 even got to be inspired by?
No, I’m honestly surprised. I’ve barely heard anything about GTA VI. Seriously. I don’t care about it, none of my friends have talked about it despite being the kinda game that they’d be into, and I’ve only seen one or two articles on it.
You sure it’s that highly anticipated? My observation is that people have gotten really sick and tired of AAA games, and this is a shift that’s occurred since RDR2 came out. Very few of the people I know still regularly play AAA games, and those who do almost never buy them on launch. I haven’t seen anywhere near the same amount of hype for GTA VI as I saw for GTA IV or GTA V.
You’re accusing me of being disingenuous? Maybe you’re the one who’s buying into the hype and overestimating public interest. Or perhaps the true answer is somewhere in the middle. Who knows. I was not intentionally downplaying your favorite series though.
The article you’re commenting on is literally about the game’s unsustainable hype and its impact on the industry.
It won Most Anticipated at TGA.
This is far from my favourite series, just enjoy shining a light on insane takes on Lemmy!
shrug Idk if it’s really that insane. Tbh I’m not convinced the hype isn’t being manufactured. I have a cousin who’s a pretty bog standard, flavor-of-the-month gamer, and he’s said nothing about GTA VI.
Not saying you’re necessarily wrong, I guess, just that something seems off.
Grand Theft Auto V came out 12 years ago and has been in the top ten best sellers almost every single month since then. It’s not manufactured; you’re just very out of the loop. It’s one of the biggest money makers in all of video games. They spent an estimated $2B on GTA6 and will almost certainly make it back within days, not years.
They’ll make it back in HOURS, especially if it launches on PC same day. I went to the V night launch way back when. There were 500+ people in line at the store I went to. I didn’t sleep for three days after getting it. The hype train is only getting started and will ramp up to supersonic once we get a firm date. I’ll be buying a copy for every platform that I own. It’s going to be sheer fucking pandemonium.
That guy has NO CLUE whatsoever in terms of GTA hype and popularity.
just a reminder that you live in a different culture than the average video game player. I haven’t even completed GTA5 and aren’t in the circle of GTA players. Hell, the funnest part for me is driving in a really big circle while listening to music, but as out of touch as I am, I know it’s really REALLY hyped
yeah not really interested to buy it outside of a sale when its obvious they will go overdrive on online revenue in 6
It did. I’ve been a GTA player since the first one kn PS1.
I’ve bought every GTA game.
I have zero interest in GTA6.
not to mention they decided to block Linux users back in October. I had very little interest in it in the last 6 or 7 years, but I decided when a friend played it I would try to join, just to be met with performance issues and getting kicked offline due to their anticheat. So stupid. It worked for years in Linux, then they just decide to boot it.
I lost what little interest period in anything GTA from that.
Same here. GTAV, while I liked it, was a minor disappointment for me and I burned out on it. Plus after seeing how GTA Online went and how greedy they got with it, I’m just not interested in Take Two/Rockstar games anymore.
I’ll wait until it gets free on Epic and proceed not playing it, since i have better things to do with my life.
They want $100 for this. They are trying to make games expensive again.
In my mind, the bigger and more expensive the dev team, the more likely the business people are to be involved. Those business types really know how to suck fun and fairness out of games in an attempt to turn it into unbridled profits.
Buy a handful of games from small independent studios instead of this if you feel similarly to me.
Was the $100 price ever confirmed? I thought it was just rumored?
The only thing Rockstar has ever officially released about the game is the teaser trailer. Everything else is pure speculation and rumormilling.
Gaming industry pundits are gooning so hard for the prospect of $100.00 standard games they keep parroting this out hoping it will become true
Are you asking me if I can predict the future?
Well since you’re posting “they want $100 for this” so matter-of-factly, you seem to believe that you can predict the future, Andy.
$100 seems like a stretch to me as they have been giving the last game away for free several times on Epic. But who knows with the console crowd…
Fun facts incoming!
Cost of “Mario 64” on release = $59.99
Development budget for Mario 64 = ~$1.56mil
Inflation adjusted Mario 64 cost in 2022 = $111.91
Inflation adjusted Mario 64 budget in 2022 = ~$2.91mil
Cost of “Elden Ring” on release = $59.99
Estimated dev. budget for Elder Ring = $100mil-200mil
Mario 64 units sold = ~12mil
Elder Ring units sold = ~28mil
These details are provided without comment. You do the math and decide whether the fact that prices haven’t changed since 1996 might be the reason for some of the enshitification we continue to see.
And now for the comment:
Consumers are horrifyingly resistant to price increases for games. It is directly responsible for many of the shitty monetization models we’ve seen. Development budget continue to rise, even on indie games, while consumers pay less and less in “real money value” over time.
It’s completely unsustainable and the very reason the “business types” get involved, forcing unpopular monetization schemes
And yet, these days I am finding better games, made by smaller teams, for lower prices (usually between $30-40) from indie devs. The cost ain’t the reason for enshittification, and paying a higher price will not mean we get better games.
I simply chose two big, well known, and beloved titles for the sake of expediency.
This problem is not unique to big budget games.
Indie devs are getting screwed too. You saying that you’ve found great games for $30-40 from indie devs isn’t an argument against more sustainable pricing like you think it is.
If the dev budget for the indie game was 5% of the AAA game but the price was 50% then you’ve literally just helped prove my point
The fact is - and I challenge you to prove me wrong here - video games continue to be hands down the best dollar-per-hour investment for entertainment. Even a $60 game that only lasts 20 hrs is still coming in at $3/hr of entertainment, which is very hard to beat. When you look at live service games where people will spend literally thousands of hours after paying anywhere from $60-200 you’re looking at $0.10/hr in some cases.
This is where it’s at now, ‘smaller’ teams that actually care about the thing they’re making.
We don’t need games made by teams of 19,000 people like AC:Shadows, it’s bloat. Skyrim was made with a team of less than 300.
If you like bigger games, and plenty do, them charging a higher price for it up front makes it more likely that they’re made sustainably. If a game costs $100M to make, the difference between breaking even on $70 versus $60 is hundreds of thousands of additional customers.
You’re very conveniently and likely deliberately leaving out that more than 1/2 the cost for Mario 64 was manufacturing the cartridge…
We’re still talking about ~3 mil to ~150 mil. If the software dev costs for Mario 64 were closer to ~1.5 mil, what does that have to do with the argument being made?
I almost replied from my inbox; glad someone said it before I even got to it haha
meh, I don’t think that the reason AAA games are bad is because they cost less. I think it’s just greed and rushing the developers.
I never said anything about the quality of the games. I’m speaking specifically to the monetization bullshit.
As I said elsewhere: budget bloat happens in a lot of places. Greedy executive and publishers is one place. Overambitious design goals that get scrapped is another. There’s also bad tools workflows, mismanagement, and any number of other contributing factors.
But even indie devs are getting screwed on pricing and making far less than they deserve to be in many cases.
If people keep buying CoD and Assassins Creed, devs will keep making them. And if they can’t increase retail price to cover the budget they will find other ways to do it.
oh, in that case yeah that’s fair, I agree
You realize that costing more does satiate the greed a little bit, right?
Like, yeah, we all know that line-goes-up capitalism isn’t sustainable, but there are still other reasons call of duty has loot boxes and battle passes now.
Now throw in average incomes on the low, medium, and high ends and see if that makes any difference in your criticism of people not wanting to spend so much on a game they might get a hundred or so hours out of.
Hell, throw in the average housing costs and costs of consumables while we’re at it.
Oh don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying the capital structure is fair by any means. I understand all the reasons why people - especially right now - are struggling to justify big purchases.
And I will readily agree that inefficient and improper use of resources is one of the contributing factors to ballooning development budgets
That said, video games are - and I challenge you to disprove this - easily one of the best investments for entertainment. Dollars-per-hour of fun on a 20hr, $60 game is $3. For a live service game where people spend hundreds of thousands of hours playing it can get below $0.10 per hour.
EDIT: I also agree that demos need to make a comeback because I’m sick of wasting money. Though people also need to read some reviews before they buy occasionally :/
Cartridge manufacturing and distribution was hella expensive back then and that took a big bite on any sales.
Digital storefronts do take as well their lion share though, but that’s on sales.
While that may be true, the costs and budgets we’re dealing with today are orders of magnitude higher than they were back then. Physical product manufacturing doesn’t even come close to making up the difference when you factor in digital storefront costs.
They’d ask $1000 for it if they thought people will pay it. No one at Take Two or Rockstar has said this. Most likely is they’ll do that $100 “advance access” thing that a lot of AAA games like to do, where you get the game a few days early. The business hasn’t gotten in the way of the fun or fairness of the campaign mode for Rockstar’s previous efforts, and if it did this time, we’ll certainly hear about it immediately.
If your game can’t even complete with a game nobody knows anything about and doesn’t even have a set release date, maybe your game just fucking sucks?
I do wanna point out that one of the Horizon games (I believe the second) got pretty screwed by releasing within a week of Elden Ring and didn’t suck. Publishers big and small do need to be careful to not release within a time frame of absolutely massive releases such as Elden Ring and, inevitably, GTA6.
Even if the game doesn’t let you play on release day, I’m willing to bet my kidney that it’ll sell millions of copies and nothing big will be released within a month of it
And the first game released close to Breath of the Wild
Oh yeah, I forgot just how bad the timing of both releases were. Didn’t the second games dlc also drop right around Shadow of the Erdtree?
A spinoff game, Horizon Call of the Mountain, which is a VR game
Ah, that’s right.
The horizon devs really need to get together with From Soft so that’ll stop happening
“Just make good games” doesn’t really work in the age where we’ve got tens of thousands of game releases per year compared to the age of a few hundred games per year.
Well making bad games isn’t working so well either is it…
The failure of a game doesn’t come hand in hand with it being bad. Lots of studios are struggling right now, because there’s just so much out there, and no one wants to compete with GTA.
Release timing is always a critical thing to think about, whether you’re talking about games, movies, TV series, or toys.
More like the sphincter of GTA 6 am I right?
