Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Where you think rockstar went wrong?

87 replies to this topic
FranklinsIron
  • FranklinsIron

    TWR: Ryanssh*tPit

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Jun 2015
  • England

#1

Posted 17 May 2016 - 02:15 PM

That table tennis game for the 360, that was also console restricted. Who agreed to finance that!?

Undermining the amount of SP lovers, when making GTA V/Online. A much more negative impact that they think, and can potentially harm future sales.

Feel free to add.

Mister Pink
  • Mister Pink

    1.61803398875

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 03 Nov 2004
  • None
  • Best Poster [Music] 2016
    Best Poster [Music] 2015
    Best Poster [Music] 2014
    Most Knowledgeable [Music] 2013
    Best Contributor [Music] 2012

#2

Posted 17 May 2016 - 03:08 PM Edited by Mister Pink, 18 May 2016 - 09:29 AM.

That's a bit of a fallacious question. One will have to agree that they "went wrong" in order to participate.   :p

 

My understanding of Rockstar Presents Table Tennis was a fresh next gen title using RAGE, their new game engine. My guess is that it was a build to use their new technology and probably advanced to a full-on game. 

 

As for Online, there's a lot of topics about that. I was a little disappointed about the replayability of SP. I don't see why the two can both be powerful and can share a spotlight but something needs to improve. 

  • ClaudeSpeed1911, Static, The Deadite and 2 others like this

Jabalous
  • Jabalous

    Villager

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 Nov 2007
  • None

#3

Posted 17 May 2016 - 05:22 PM Edited by FiS!!HeR, 17 May 2016 - 06:41 PM.

Table Tennis was an experiment of Rockstar Advanced Game Engine. I remember reading more drama about it and why Rockstar particularly chose a table tennis game to show off RAGE. It is said that it's one of Sam Houser's favorite pastimes. I, myself, enjoy playing it, in reality of course, but I've not done so for years now.

 

As for where Rockstar went wrong, I can't go beyond GTA Online. I am sure that they know, at heart, that they're doing it to generate more profit over the years as it has been stated by Take2 in numerous occasions when talking about the new business model. In their deep hearts, I don't imagine that they're enjoying what they're doing with it, at least the senior people. I've always known Rockstar by their creativity and for being risk-takers, but when I look at GTA Online, I can't find any of that at all.

  • Darrel, GTA_fear, gunziness and 9 others like this

FranklinsIron
  • FranklinsIron

    TWR: Ryanssh*tPit

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Jun 2015
  • England

#4

Posted 17 May 2016 - 05:32 PM

Love the reply.

Yeah, I understand that concept. Just frustrating that, deep down they won't touch SP, because it's "not financially viable". But choose table tennis as a foundation for a game, to show off their engine. Don't get me wrong, in terms of table tennis, game is great. (If you understand what I mean), just very limited audience and only played it because got it free with 360.

100 percent agree with that. Safest and most financially secure road they have taken. Genuinely is the "sell your soul" concept, ignoring the hearts of diehard rockstar supporters, to draw in young impatient children, blinded by material objects and colours, to buy their shark cards.
Just see your response Mister pink!

Contradictive, need to lay off talking about online. I go on a rant as above lol, and start talking/typing for hours, like I have every other thread I go on.
  • Mister Pink and Maibatsu545 like this

M.K.N.
  • M.K.N.

    Witness me, Bloodbag!

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2014
  • Puerto-Rico

#5

Posted 17 May 2016 - 05:33 PM

The lack of actual customer support. They always leave their replies automated and will never, if rarely, make any actual replies when it comes to dealing with issues from their games.

  • Lock N' Stock, Maibatsu545 and Thesmophoriazusae like this

FranklinsIron
  • FranklinsIron

    TWR: Ryanssh*tPit

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Jun 2015
  • England

#6

Posted 17 May 2016 - 05:44 PM

Totally agree with that! Nor do they take "advice" from hardcore gamers or lovers of rockstar, like they say they do. They only respond/promote to ideas, they already had and then make it look, they are listening..

M.K.N.
  • M.K.N.

    Witness me, Bloodbag!

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2014
  • Puerto-Rico

#7

Posted 17 May 2016 - 07:21 PM

Totally agree with that! Nor do they take "advice" from hardcore gamers or lovers of rockstar, like they say they do. They only respond/promote to ideas, they already had and then make it look, they are listening..

 

If by listening means not paying attention, then yes. R* clearly doesn't pay attention to their fans at all.


BLOOD
  • BLOOD

    By: Blood-Is-in-Diamond or BiiD

  • Members
  • Joined: 21 Dec 2013
  • None
  • Take-Two Analyst of the Year

#8

Posted 17 May 2016 - 09:48 PM Edited by BLOOD-MOND, 17 May 2016 - 10:10 PM.

Rockstar via it Rockstar San Diego game studio (known for the RED DEAD & MIDNIGHT CLUB franchises) owns the RAGE Technology Group which owns the RAGE ENGINE.So I think it was hard last gen even President Sam Houser called RDR development "Nightmare" however now that the Engine is now in it 2.0 life and with what they did with GTA V on PS4/XB1/PC future games from their IPs will be a breeze of relieve to do.Now I hope they do Table Tennis 2.



Note:RAGE is now so "POWERFUL" that GTA V won Best Remaster Game 2014.

FranklinsIron
  • FranklinsIron

    TWR: Ryanssh*tPit

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Jun 2015
  • England

#9

Posted 17 May 2016 - 10:44 PM

Totally agree with that! Nor do they take "advice" from hardcore gamers or lovers of rockstar, like they say they do. They only respond/promote to ideas, they already had and then make it look, they are listening..

 
If by listening means not paying attention, then yes. R* clearly doesn't pay attention to their fans at all.
sorry yeah, type fast on this phone sometimes grammar/words change or go out of turnip.

Mion
  • Mion

    KD*

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 May 2014
  • Olympics
  • Doggo-Chop Winner 2016

#10

Posted 18 May 2016 - 11:26 AM

Singleplayer was hilariously lacking, the story didn't have the same feel previous GTAs did and it was too much of a comedy with not enough somber to counter it so it was an off-balanced mess.

  • Maibatsu545, TheRealSnitch, ZillKentornoes and 2 others like this

ARC8_1982
  • ARC8_1982

    Playa

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 Jan 2014
  • None

#11

Posted 18 May 2016 - 12:14 PM

I've been interested in GTA V from the very start, even though there was no mentioning of PC version at first, with every new trailer R* was building impression of a greatest experience ever, experience as deep as ocean. Final experience is the game is still quite good when compared to most of the games of this current generation, but not as solid as before. So in my opinion, biggest mistake they made was leaving sp to rot, pretending it doesn't exist, when in reality GTA was always about sp in the first place. It's hard to believe they completely reject sp, no ofcourse not, they will return to sp at some point, but when ? My biggest hope is this years E3 2016, another mistake they made is lack of proper communication with gamers.

  • Maibatsu545 likes this

Sunrise Driver
  • Sunrise Driver

    The Infidel

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 30 Mar 2008
  • United-States

#12

Posted 18 May 2016 - 05:26 PM

Cutting cases from the game (LA Noire) and selling them as DLCs. Half a year later it didn't matter though but still game should've been whole from the start.

  • Spaghetti Cat, Maibatsu545 and Thesmophoriazusae like this

Vanzant
  • Vanzant

    おっぱい 23V

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 11 Feb 2005
  • United-States

#13

Posted 18 May 2016 - 08:51 PM

This isn't something new, people on this forum have been complaining about RockStars decisions as far back as I can remember.

 

I think the first major rant was when the Xbox came out with the enhanced versions of GTAIII and Vice City. There was also the time people went nuts over the PS2 release of Liberty City stories, I even have screenshots of people posting they won't buy anymore RockStar games.

 

In the end it's a business like any other...

  • LL Cool L, Videogames888 and Thesmophoriazusae like this

Adriaan
  • Adriaan

    Uncut

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Jun 2005
  • None
  • Most Helpful [GTA Series] 2012
    Most Knowledgeable [GTA Series] 2012
    Most Respected 2012
    Most Helpful 2012
    Best Returning Member 2012
    Best Contributor [GTA Series] 2012
    Best Forum Ledby 2012
    Best Moderator 2012

#14

Posted 18 May 2016 - 09:57 PM

Remember the days when "Rockstar Energy Drink" dominated monster trucks? Nowdays all you see is "Monster Energy Drink".

  • MrGrandis, Maibatsu545, Black_Jesus and 4 others like this

Raj Brunner
  • Raj Brunner

    "There is no knowledge that is not power"

  • Members
  • Joined: 01 Oct 2015
  • United-States

#15

Posted 19 May 2016 - 10:26 PM

It seems to me they're doing fine. I mean they are still recognize as one of the greatest video game companies.


/_/_Xrtist_/_/
  • /_/_Xrtist_/_/

    Xrtist

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 May 2016
  • United-States

#16

Posted 19 May 2016 - 11:40 PM Edited by /_/_Xrtist_/_/, 19 May 2016 - 11:40 PM.

I firmly believe that Rockstar is going to be worst than EA with the time. EA may have a lot of franchises on their hands, but R* has GTA, Max Payne, Bully etc etc, you know; the untouchables, unlike anything EA owns.

 

With their solid power and good pr in the media and amongs the players, they will use their advantage to get even worse than EA by using DLC and ingame purchase stuff. They will become an even bigger joke than EA ever was.

  • Maibatsu545 likes this

B Dawg
  • B Dawg

    Motosoldier

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Dec 2008
  • Bosnia-and-Herzegovina

#17

Posted 20 May 2016 - 09:47 AM Edited by B Dawg, 20 May 2016 - 09:52 AM.

- Red Dead Redemption, Midnight Club: Los Angeles, Liberty and Vice City Stories: not having a PC version

- The Ballad Of Gay Tony and Grand Theft Auto V: for being mediocre in comparison to previous GTAs

  • Sunrise Driver, PhillBellic, Maibatsu545 and 4 others like this

Osho
  • Osho

    High Roller

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 03 Nov 2012
  • None

#18

Posted 20 May 2016 - 12:59 PM Edited by Osho, 20 May 2016 - 01:01 PM.

- Online. Didn't expect to see R* becoming a sell out for easy cash grab through micro transactions and showing finger to the old SP fans who made GTA popular to begin with.
- Making boring games like GTA IV and RDR for reasons; partly explained by Warren Spector in the forum sig, and partly because of the multiplayer focus, for the trend of creating DLCs, and introducing ( GTA V ) strict DRM policies that requires internet connection to play SP.
- Stale and rehashing style of repetitive elements seen across many titles like IV, RDR, V be story, gameplay or content. Basically, old vine in three different bottles with more or less common approach in the core concept behind these games, in contrast to PS2 titles like SA, Manhunt, The Warriors, offered interesting ideas and different gaming experiences that hardly saw further potential to become more innovative and better in their modern games.
  • Maibatsu545 and Thesmophoriazusae like this

Spider-Vice
  • Spider-Vice

    ...I will very carefully explain to you why it cannot be.

  • Zaibatsu
  • Joined: 09 Oct 2006
  • Portugal
  • Best Poster [Rockstar Games] 2016
    Contribution Award [GTA V]

#19

Posted 26 May 2016 - 11:30 AM

- Mismanagement that resulted/results in tons of cut content and delays in the game, plus creative blockades and content repetition.

- GTA Online - still not sure whether this was something crazy Leslie Benz thought of and the Housers didn't like it, or the other way around, but I agree that GTA Online probably doesn't sit too well with the people at R*. But what's done is done.

- GTA V - GTA V was shaping up to be their most epic game, but suddenly something called GTA Online came mid-development (dev logs) and RIP single player.

 

There's more but I think these are some of the main ones.

  • gamerzworld, MrGrandis, Journey_95 and 8 others like this

Raj Brunner
  • Raj Brunner

    "There is no knowledge that is not power"

  • Members
  • Joined: 01 Oct 2015
  • United-States

#20

Posted 26 May 2016 - 09:59 PM Edited by Raj Brunner, 08 November 2016 - 08:26 PM.

I firmly believe that Rockstar is going to be worst than EA with the time. EA may have a lot of franchises on their hands, but R* has GTA, Max Payne, Bully etc etc, you know; the untouchables, unlike anything EA owns.

 

With their solid power and good pr in the media and amongs the players, they will use their advantage to get even worse than EA by using DLC and ingame purchase stuff. They will become an even bigger joke than EA ever was.

Just because they put up some shark cards for sale doesn't mean they're going to be worse than EA. Most gaming companies sell DLC, to make money. Not to mention how Rockstar gives DLC updates for free. 


/_/_Xrtist_/_/
  • /_/_Xrtist_/_/

    Xrtist

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 May 2016
  • United-States

#21

Posted 26 May 2016 - 10:10 PM

You must see the big picture. V was enough for me to see their new path. 3Dera will be enough for me, always.
  • Maibatsu545 likes this

Maibatsu545
  • Maibatsu545

    veritas vos liberabit

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 Feb 2014
  • United-States

#22

Posted 02 June 2016 - 03:17 PM Edited by Maibatsu545, 20 June 2017 - 02:03 PM.

I first felt it was around the Hot Coffee scandal. They really showed arrogance saying it was a 100% user generated mod they had nothing to do with. That seemed really shady to me, but at that point in time Rockstar could do no wrong in my eyes, so I ignored it and waited for the next-gen GTA. IV got massive hype before release. I bought it day one at midnight.

At first, it was amazing and immersive, but by the time I got to Algonquin things seemed to go downhill. By Alderney i was pretty much bored with the game. Mind you, this had NEVER happened to me with a GTA before. Or at least, not so soon. I eventually got bored with them all, but it took YEARS to finally see all the features and side missions the games had. With IV it felt stale after a few months. Once you finished the story there was nothing interesting Niko could do. I realize that's because at that point in Niko's life he was starting to get out of crime,but that's just the problem. R* seemed too concerned with telling a story and the narrative,and as a result the gameplay and mission freedom ended up taking a back seat. Graphically, it was a nice HD upgrade with ragdoll physics and what not, but the gameplay options and mission freedom seemed scaled way back compared to San Andreas.

What really hit me was that certain things that should be commonplace by GTA4, (Parachutes, heavier weapons) were completely missing. Then I thought back to R*'s deal with M$ to have DLC. I realized that parachutes were intentionally left out of the game so they'd have something to sell to you later. Sure enough, what ends up being in EFLC? Parachutes and heavy weapons. Exactly like I had predicted. The disease of microtransactions had spread to my favorite game company. That's when they really changed in my eyes. I was disillusioned, but still ready for V.

Then the wait happened.

R* jerked us around for YEARS with a terrible 'blackout' marketing campaign. RDR was a nice distraction, but by the time they were trying to push Max Payne 3 on us I had had it with them. With such a long wait with no word on V, it had to be amazing, right? Wrong.

V's singleplayer turned out to be even MORE shallow than IV's continuing the trend from Ballad of Gay Tony with annoying characters and a style that was all flash with no substance. Then it got even worse with them cancling the SP DLC. I tried to move on to Online but it's just more shallow garbage, made worse by the TERRIBLE p2p netowrk and matchmaking system. Combine that with the zero-effort crash grab 10th anniversary editions of 3D era games, and R* has pretty much sold out in my eyes. I just watched the trailer for the new contraband system in Online and didn't even feel a twinge of hype. It just looks like more reptitive grinding bullsh*t. Why can't they just bring back the drug dealing system from CTW? Is that really so much to ask? It just looks like a yet another meaningless way for GTAOnline players to waste their cash. I don't know, I haven't played it yet, but thats just the impression the trailer gives me. Leslie Benzies leaving just confirmed my feelings of the company changing for the worse. It seems to ke they've lost their creative spirit they once had, and are now just going through the motions to make as much money as possible in the cheapest/easiest manner.

I'd have to say I'm not really hyped at all about GTA 6. I just expect it to be more of the same. I preordered and bought the collectors edition of V, on day one. Now I think I'll wait for review before i even think about buying second hand. I know now we cannot trust R*'s trailer and marketing in the slightest.

And that's okay. I like the III era games and will continue to play them. I also enjoy the III era forums better, they are less aggressive and argumentative. So R* doesn't mean much to me anymore, but I'll always thank the, for the memories they gave me in the past. But they shouldnt expect me or anyone else who grew up with the III era to be hyped about whatever they have coming out next.
  • MrGrandis, Algonquin Assassin, B Dawg and 10 others like this

PhillBellic
  • PhillBellic

  • Members
  • Joined: 03 Jul 2012
  • Australia
  • Ban Roulette Winner 2016

#23

Posted 03 June 2016 - 06:29 AM

For me, it was when they 'Sold Out' and caught a bad case of Cash-Carditus.

  • Adrian J., Maibatsu545, Pedinhuh and 1 other like this

Pedinhuh
  • Pedinhuh

    Rest in peace, Chester.

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Jun 2014
  • Brazil

#24

Posted 03 June 2016 - 08:49 PM Edited by pedinhuh, 03 June 2016 - 08:52 PM.

For me, firstly when they realised they should cut content and put then in DLCs to generate more profit, back IV's era with EFLC, something I'm terribly against.

Secondly when they realised the amounts of profits they could get from an Online game, I don't have a issue with Online itself or multiplayer, but how they handled the V and Online, by LOCKING content out of V so they could use it in a way to attract more players to Online, and then leaving V to rot and cancelling it's much needed story expansion.

And then there's also the fact that they have gone from a game company that made hardcore games with incredible stories and that were very fun to play, to a game company that only cares about ONE SINGLE GAME(just check the Newswire, it's online this, and Online that, blah, blah, blah Online) and makes games that panders to casual gamers.

This harmed the respect I had for them soo much that I will take caution and not buy their next game until I believe it's worth to do so.
When I bought V all I did was look into some "respectable" reviews of the game, praising everything it had like it was the Holy Grail(including Online, even though Online was broken at the time period).

  • B Dawg, thehambone and Maibatsu545 like this

enjoyingorc6742
  • enjoyingorc6742

    SA Monster Truck Fanboy

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Nov 2015
  • United-States

#25

Posted 12 June 2016 - 04:36 AM

the moment they listened to the whiners complaining about the handling in GTA IV and when they fired The Benz

  • B Dawg, PhillBellic, eCola and 1 other like this

sammystarock
  • sammystarock

    Mark Chump

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 Oct 2014
  • None

#26

Posted 14 June 2016 - 08:02 AM

OK, so I have been more of a silent reader on GTAF lately, precisely because R* and the R* community was pissing me off, but I'd like to say something.

 

The problem with R* is that it basically always used to be and still is an illusion. They give you this perfect feeling of a very small, special snowflake, community driven, alternative game studio. Their brand is what it's all about. When you see the R* logo, it's like when you see the Apple logo, or the TRUMP logo. You either love it or hate it, both being a product of their smart marketing. The feeling associated with R* is "special". You tend to think of a friendly, Warhorse Studios like, commited bunch of game developers that want nothing but to make awesome games.

 

The truth is that it is all just a play, maintained by the (mostly) high quality games they make and their smart marketing, which is so non-binary, so non-cisgender, questioning and alternative compared to other developers. The working conditions in R* studios are notoriously sh*t and their main goal always was, and is always going to be, to make big profit and grow their business. Are they capable of making great games? Yes. Are they willing to make great games? Yes. Do they have a more creative force than many other games developers? Yes. Do they focus on all these virtues? No. Their primary goal is, as I said, to grow their business. And only if this first factor is given, will they actually put work into their game. And guess what, if growing their business will work better with a sh*tty game concept, they will chose the sh*tty one.

 

With truthfully commited game developers, who put their lifeblood into the games they want to make, and sacrifice everything to do so, it's the other way around. The priority for those is to make the game they want to make, profit comes second. Once again, Warhorse Studios is a great example. Daniel Vávra's game idea got refused by multiple publishers, so he took the risk and built everything on its own.
R* always tried to sell you the illusion of being exactly this, the only thing that has changed by now, is that they slowly fail to do so. A quick look at the R* newswire is enough. Probably more than 8/10, if not 9/10 "news articles" are about the most boring GTA Online related things ever. Pretty much the same scheme as the most stereotypical MMO's front page's blog.

 

R* was fun when I was 12, I feel like I'm slowly getting too old for this crap.

  • B Dawg, Piggsy pls, Maibatsu545 and 2 others like this

Sunrise Driver
  • Sunrise Driver

    The Infidel

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 30 Mar 2008
  • United-States

#27

Posted 15 June 2016 - 05:08 PM

- DITCHING MIDNIGHT CLUB FRANCHISE.

  • MrGrandis, PhillBellic, Pedinhuh and 4 others like this

MissingNoGuy55
  • MissingNoGuy55

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2013
  • None

#28

Posted 21 June 2016 - 11:00 PM

To be honest, I preferred the charismatic, dry humor of Vice City than the vulgar, obscene humor that is prevalent in GTA today. It's really easy to make a bunch of sex jokes and 69 puns, but it's not easy to write the kind of humor that was in the older games.

  • Sunrise Driver, PkUnzipper and Maibatsu545 like this

John The Grudge
  • John The Grudge

    Gangsta

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Mar 2009
  • Scotland

#29

Posted 23 June 2016 - 09:20 AM

I suppose as a publicly trading company Rockstar Games have one goal, and that's to be as profitable as possible.  It appears that they've achieved that and then some.  No doubt a big part of their business going forward will be micro-transaction such as shark cards.  This brings me to my issue.  There is no way (NO WAY) that online and shark cards won't be an ever increasing part of their business going forward.  By comparison single player is far less profitable.  That doesn't bode well for the future as far as single player goes.  They've been silent for so long now that I think any good will they enjoyed following GTA V has dissipated to nothing.  They've totally isolated themselves from gamers.  I don't understand why they have to be so secretive that they won't even acknowledge that they're even working on something.  Try asking them and you'll get some spiel about GTA Online.

  • Jabalous likes this

Fooking Rekt
  • Fooking Rekt

    Special Vehicle Collector

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 06 Oct 2015
  • GoSquared

#30

Posted 23 June 2016 - 01:06 PM

Where they went wrong? GTA V, definately.

  • B Dawg, eCola, TheRealSnitch and 2 others like this




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users