I don't see how that is a big question at all. You're telling me that somehow Rockstar could not complete this new IP for Sony(which is a baseless rumor cooked up in this thread), so instead of making them another new IP as per this agreement, which would be safer, faster and more financially viable for them, they're going to hand Sony over exclusivity(or timed exclusivity) of their biggest franchise. I don't see how that makes any sense at all. Even if they were to hand over an existing franchise, it's many times more likely that it would be a sequel to Bully, Manhunt or Midnight Club than it would be GTA.

I do get the desire some have for this to happen, but give five minutes of good thought to this, and it's plainly obvious that out of the many scenarios that could come out of this, GTA V is probably the least likely of them all to happen. When they gave 360 an exclusive IP way back, it ended up being Table Tennis(insert fart noise here). Let's at least go with the trends, and less with the dream scenarios. This whole thread was made because of the limited knowledge we have over this situation, and if we're going to create threads with that as the proof something exists, then we should abide by what that knowledge sets down, which is that the new game will be an original IP and it will not be LA Noire. Anything past that is strictly fantasy, and is not a discussion at all, just the wet dreams of a fanatic or three.

The worst part about the argument is that it's one of those reach-a-scenario-first-and-then-make-the-evidence-point-that-way threads, and I hate those, because the defending party will never concede ever as long as there's a minute possibility that they could be right, and they will argue it as the likeliest of scenarios because of it. There were countless reasons why this shouldn't happen and likely isn't happening, but as long as there's a one in a million shot, let's just keep arguing the point. Two many incidents have to fall right in line, too many assumptions have to fill in the gaps, and too much logic needs to be ignored for this to happen. Even your reply to me was me providing the last known bit of evidence and you then making two assumptions to reach a different conclusion than what it says. Sure it could be GTA V, but it could also be a thousand other things, so why bother discussing it when we don't have a damn thing to argue for or against it? All we have is our own general knowledge of how this industry works and our own common sense, and both point away from GTA V, not towards it.

Munkeh most of this is being addressed towards the general argument put forth, not necessarily all directed at you.

Instead of ragging on us for having a little fun why don't you join in. The point you are missing is that here we are speculating, thus it is not an arguement to win or lose. There is no "defending party" even if some people become defensive when such speculation is contrived. 

I will ask you some questions now and you will not be able to give a concrete definative answers to them only your best guess or speculation:

1. Going into this gen, before they or anyone knew what the sales of any of these consoles would be, Sony must have known that GTA3/VC/SA was a huge factor in PS2's success. Why would they not aggressively seek out a contract with Rockstar in order to preseve this advantage?To answer this question you may need to throw away everything you've learned from VG charts about sales, userbase etc. Because you will need to actually put yourself in Sonys shoes before this generation even started.

2. What has become of this elusive, exclusive IP which R* has promised Sony?

This is my fun. I enjoy having healthy debates with people on here. If you want me to have your version of fun then fine. Let's just think up two scenarios and flip a coin to see which one wins. Or let's think up six different scenarios and roll a dice. Maybe we can make a board game out of it. What I don't get is you presenting information online and then ignoring what that info says. Ultimately, if you wanted a fun and free thread, you should have just notified everyone to check their logic at the door and just made this a joke thread. Trying to speculate a scenario is inviting logic, trends and information into the thread, so telling me now at page 3 you're just fucking around is too little too late. You've already taken this thread far too seriously yourself, by arguing back and forth with those disagreeing with you.

Now for the answers to your questions:

1. Maybe Sony did seek out a contract with Rockstar and Rockstar simply refused. There's nothing stating Rockstar has to accept any agreement Sony puts on the table, since the ball is ultimately in Rockstar's court on where they want to decide their top franchise is going. By not signing a contract at all, it allows them the freedom to make their own choices, which is precisely why Rockstar is an independent third party studio in the first place. Or as another scenario, maybe Sony themselves felt they'ed be in the same situation as last generation, meaning the third parties would be groveling at their feet to make exclusives for them. In fact, wasn't Sony's stance going into this generation that they wouldn't be purchasing exclusives from third parties? Or, maybe...just maybe...it's one of a thousand other plausible scenarios, only a few of which actually lead to your end result. I can speculate for days, but to narrow the numerous scenarios down, that's when the logic comes in, so we can decide whether GTA V is more likely or whether Rockstar making a fitness simulator for PS3 for $400 is more likely. Both are possible, but that doesn't mean it's worth discussing, unless we can begin narrowing the likeliehood of each down with what we already know.

2. No one knows. Maybe it's being made. Maybe it's not. I don't need to speculate on it the same way I never had to speculate on a thousand other long forgotten projects that eventually got made or got scrapped. Ultimately though, the only info you have that suggests the existence of an exclusive project is that blog post you provided, and it clearly states it'll be an original IP. Go back and actually address my earlier points if you want to continue discussing this, because I have provided sound reasoning why there's little reason to think a scrapped new IP would in turn become the next Grand Theft Auto game. It just doesn't make sense. If it happens then it happens, so be it. I wouldn't care, but it isn't even remotely likely and you know it.

The fact is, there is no evidence that R* are going to give GTA V exclusive to PS3, and chances are, won't here anything from Rockstar North this E3. However, at E3 06 (maybe 07) Jack Tretton announced that Rockstar games were going to bring a new IP to the PlayStation 3 exclusively, which Tretton confirmed to Geoff Keighly was no LA Noire. Since then there has been nothing, and when Keighly again asked Tretton about it at last year's E3, he said something like "unfortunately, I don't know anything more." Old rumours were that this was a spiritual successor to Red Dead Revolver (after the leaked wild west footage) but of course this is now known to be Read Dead Redemption, so now the questions are what is going on?

Table Tennis was only an exclusive because the PS3 was not out, and they did not bother to port it, so we cannot really go on trends from that.

So yeah, GTA V pure speculation, and hope, and there is no evidence pointing to it.