it would be funny if it was ffxiii regaining exclusivity XD lmfao ! .. though that'd never happen.. would be funny regardless.
Check out my game about moles ^
| Max King of the Wild said: now to respond to the doesnt make sense part. the way i see it GTA5 represents the next GTA and not the actual 5th game. TT could have went to Sony asking Sony to finance GTA4. Sony could have refused. TT then could have entered into another agreement. one to of let TT use the money earned from 4 to make the exclusive game they owe Sony. All the while getting a loan from MS to be able to finish 4 up and giving them DLC in return |
Nice.
My speculation is that Take 2 actualy bought out of the contract. With an agreement from MS to get the 50 million from exclusive DLC, an incentive overide whatever that penelty was.
However there is a remote possibility that the contract was unbreakable. And Sony allowed for GTA4 multiplat in return for the GTA 5 exclusive.
| Max King of the Wild said: now to respond to the doesnt make sense part. the way i see it GTA5 represents the next GTA and not the actual 5th game. TT could have went to Sony asking Sony to finance GTA4. Sony could have refused. TT then could have entered into another agreement. one to of let TT use the money earned from 4 to make the exclusive game they owe Sony. All the while getting a loan from MS to be able to finish 4 up and giving them DLC in return |
That wouldn't make much sense either. The game cost about $100 million to make, I think is a well documented figure. And they made (again, my own approximation) $175 million on the 360 version alone (plus $125m on the PS3 version).
They got $50 million for the DLC, which by your argumentation would mean that they borrowed $50 million from sony in return for losing approx. $175 of revenue from a future 360 version. You're still lacking $125 million for that move to make any sense.
What would make sense in that case would be to borrow the money from a bank. At 10% interest, over 3 years of developement time, that would be a cost of $20m (assuming they needed 50m). Much better than $125m.
Apology accepted by the way. :)
This is invisible text!
isn't the loss of exclusivity one of the reasons ken Kutaragi got sacked? he had the chance to secure exclusivity of grand theft auto and assassins creed, but was either slow about securing them or just ignored them. At least, those were the rumor's floating about when those games were announced multi platform.
As far as an exclusive contract, I don' think so. I think rockstar always approached them with the idea of exclusivity for each game, but they never had a contract for the series. However, I don't know for sure.
What I do know is you can blame the father of the playstation brand for the series no longer being exlcusive, or timed exclusive anyway. It never really was exclusive.
Killergran said:
That wouldn't make much sense either. The game cost about $100 million to make, I think is a well documented figure. And they made (again, my own approximation) $175 million on the 360 version alone (plus $125m on the PS3 version). They got $50 million for the DLC, which by your argumentation would mean that they borrowed $50 million from sony in return for losing approx. $175 of revenue from a future 360 version. You're still lacking $125 million for that move to make any sense. What would make sense in that case would be to borrow the money from a bank. At 10% interest, over 3 years of developement time, that would be a cost of $20m (assuming they needed 50m). Much better than $125m.
Apology accepted by the way. :) |
Another assumption you're making is that during the early stages of GTA 4's conception that everyone including take two know that PS3 would not dominate.
If GTA for had been exclusive to PS3 (or 360 or whatever) there would be no HD console war. Not even close. MS was very smart in picking up games that were once exclusive and had made the PS2 dominate so hard.You have this parity because all these blockbusters this gen PS360 have had to share them. Need I remind you that GTA 3 and all it's iterations sold spectacularly on PS2? Even early into PS2's lifecycle before it was the absolute king of the hill. There's no need to throw around that 175 mill number.
The point is- what I'm wondering is- What could have compelled Sony to give up it's biggest ace?
| gergroy said: isn't the loss of exclusivity one of the reasons ken Kutaragi got sacked? he had the chance to secure exclusivity of grand theft auto and assassins creed, but was either slow about securing them or just ignored them. At least, those were the rumor's floating about when those games were announced multi platform. As far as an exclusive contract, I don' think so. I think rockstar always approached them with the idea of exclusivity for each game, but they never had a contract for the series. However, I don't know for sure. What I do know is you can blame the father of the playstation brand for the series no longer being exlcusive, or timed exclusive anyway. It never really was exclusive. |
We have a Winner!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It was in fact a Sony fuck up. Ken's to be exact.
Id say there's enough GTA games out there. Rockstar, no more please! You shouldve ended the series at Vice City!
@ maffka, firstly you know that is not going to happen, but also I know some people did not like IV, but I thought everyone agreed SA was incredible. Personally I can't wait for another one
I WANT A YAKUZA THEMED GTA GAME
Vote Today To Help Get A Konami & SEGA Game Localized.This Will Only Work If Lots Of People Vote.
Click on the Image to Head to the Voting Page (A vote for Yakuza is a vote to save gaming)
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2026 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
