So.....since the beginning of the generation, all those "exclusives" that Microsoft nabbed up were just from loan money, is what you're trying to say? Bioshock was a loan? Multiple JRPGs were a loan? I doubt that they just loan money out to every developers for timed exclusivity on their games. The INDUSTRY doesn't do business like that. 

Link please to where Microsoft or Take Two says it was a loan. I can link you to where the higher ups at Take Two say that it cost $25M per episode. You lose on both counts

Wow. There are a lot of people in here that swear they know what they're talking about on both sides.

1. The original comments from Lainie Goldstein are obnoxiously vague in what they actually mean. They obviously weren't meant as a means to spills the beans on a private deal to the general public. So much can be assumed by his comments, but very little derived. There's also a lack of content since we don't have the question he was asked in the stripped articles we're getting his quote from.

2. Are we seriously listening to Michael Pachter now because it's convenient? I mean really. I'm not saying the guy is wrong, but let's at least show a little consistency here regarding the man.

3. Really what we know from this deal is very little, because that's all anyone that does know cares to tell us. So let's act like we know as much as we actually do and stop the nonsense assumptions on good or bad business practices.

There is a difference between listening to Pachter when he is making a crazy Wii HD prediction or other predictions he makes...and telling exacly how a GTA DLC deal works. There is not a spot in that article where Pachter says "In my opinion Microsoft loaned..." or "What I think happened is...".

Are you saying he is just flat out lying?

No. Are you saying he without a shadow of a doubt has insider knowledge to this particular transaction and wasn't merely guesstimating? Just because someone starts their sentence making it appear as fact doesn't necessarily mean they meant to or actually knows anything. The majority of this site craps out opinions and guesstimations pretending to be facts all the time. They also give out lousy predictions, lousy market analysis and general lousy knowledge about the business end of gaming just like this man does. I mean the guy speaks in words like "hardcore gamer" and "casual gamer" to explain software sales like he's a 15 year old forum frequenter and I'm supposed to listen to what he says just because he says it?

Yup, I have not link on the specifics of the deal...so you can ontinue to believe that M$ paid $50 million to secure  exclusivity for 6 months.  At any rate...M$ EDD reported another $300 million plus quarter and hte fifth in hte row...so evidently, they are doing A-OK in the business department, and making the right calls.

Why is it that speculation (the $50M being a loan) is now being regarded as fact, especially when "it was a loan" came from absolutely nowhere? And the only facts that we do have are, conversely, being regarded as speculation. Here's the tangible facts that we know of. Take Two had a conference call. In it, some execs said "Microsoft gave us $50M. It's going to be about $25M per episode for GTAIV"......and you're trying to spin that to make me sound ignorant?

Yea, sure. You can continue to believe that loan speculation, which was generated PURELY by forum goers and never ONCE stated by MS or T2, is fact. I'll listen to what the guys at Take Two say. And I don't care about their earning this quarter. #1 They're MS....you know, the big multibillion dollar company that has like 95% of the computer marketshare. Have they ever posted in the red, the whole company, not just the games division (which, by the way, that $300M figure isn't just from games)? #2 The deal with Take Two was in early 2007. What relevance does that earnings report have here anyway?

Whether you call it loan or advanced them the money...what we are talking about here is standard business practices used in the entertianment industry.  Look at movies or music...you ADVANCE somebody money, if you are confident of sales figures, and you will recoup them on the other end...nothing amazing here, but what are suggesting is that M$ simply forked over $50 million for exclusivity...which is wrong, imho.

Why is it so hard to believe that they forked over money for temporary exclusivity? Hell, they did it with Tales of Vesperia. Namco Bandai straight up said they did. Extrapolate that situation to GTAIV, which is one of the biggest games this generation, and the $50M doesn't seem so unrealistic. This game was THE game that they took from the Playstation. The fact that they paid some amount for exclusivity shouldn't even be brought into question since they've done it so much before. For GTAIV? They'd pay any amount

Okay...if you want to believe that...go right ahead...I have my doubts about that. As for those other game series, you have no idea what the terms were...but based on comments from Japanese developers, it seemed that M$ invested money in developing games for the 360...which made sense, as a way to encourage developers to learn to program on the 360, and exclusivity was the by-product. So, it's basically, here's $3-4 million to help defray the cost of making the games, and I'll (as in M$) will make it up on sales. In fact, that's why that article said about 8 months ago...the Japanese developers HAD to port it the PS3 to make money...so if M$ paid for the whole bill...why would the Japanese developer care about breaking even...seems like they would be at breakeven from unit one.