Ballad of Gay Tony PS3/PC Possible proof?

[GuruAskew]

 

could it be that the deal with M$ prevents R* from breathing a word of DLC coming to other platforms ...

 

could it be that the deal with M$ prevents R* from ever releasing the DLC on PS3 and PC ...

 

 

CharmingCharlie has already explained why it's not locked;

 

You don't need to click that link. The real reason is that CharmingCharlie is a PC user and he himself is in the same desperate denial that a lot of other non-360 owners are.

 

 

 

[CharmingCharlie]

Laufas if you come into this topic ONE more time asking for it to be locked then you will find out why I am not "charming". This topic is remaining open till it is beyond doubt that the DLC is not coming to the PC/PS3.

 

There is circumstantial evidence that the 50 million dollars was a LOAN if that is the case then the xbox camp are basically saying Rockstar gave away all rights to the DLC for free .

[shinsta312]

 

could it be that the deal with M$ prevents R* from breathing a word of DLC coming to other platforms ...

 

could it be that the deal with M$ prevents R* from ever releasing the DLC on PS3 and PC ...

 

 

CharmingCharlie has already explained why it's not locked;

 

You don't need to click that link. The real reason is that CharmingCharlie is a PC user and he himself is in the same desperate denial that a lot of other non-360 owners are.

Guru, seriously...stop.

 

Your arguments are now just becoming a desperate attempt to prove that you're right about this situation.

 

Nobody is gonna be right until one way or the other happens. It's as simple as that. And that might not happen until next year.

 

Until then, there is still hope, as it is not yet announced on whatever or not EFLC will come to the PS3 and/or PC.

Edited October 16, 2009 by shinsta312

[Jonny04]

Omg this topic is such a fecking fail now. It's funny trying to decide who to support here, I feel tempted to own these idiots with all their fecking ps3 superior bullsh*t, and Uncharted 2 blah blah. Well let me tell you as a PS/360 owner I have the best of both worlds, have been a playstation fan for ages but in recent years have realised how immature alot of Playstation owners are, in turn driving me away from the console and it's inferior line up of exclusives that appeal to me, all the appealing ones are now on 360, which happens to be the main dev console so I win there, plus enjoy better online services. So sadly my £425 brick is good for my 97 Blu-ray movie collection atm and Uncharted 1.

 

I find it hilarious with some of these lines "the ps3 is superior because it has 8 processors to the 360's one processor" Well actually that statement is made up of fail.

 

"What exclusives- what halo and gears- ha ha we have UC2, MGS4, GT5, etc etc" That is fail Forza 3 next week best racing game of all time according to many critics, and who can disagree. As for 3rd party COD6 is next month on the superior console, with superior online. Gran Turismo is a maybe for me, fell out with that game back in the GT3 days when they were ripping you off with the £25 demo discs just like GT5p.

 

Finally now that it's been confirmed for the nth time and officially on video "this is the end of the GTA4 saga" well that is it PS3 fans, no hoping for a 3rd just for you. So look forward to the next GTA because after I have played with Gay Tony thats what I will be doing.

 

Finally my statements may seem fanboy with "superior console, online" but after testing out both you would really have to be a fool to say it's not for all things 1st party, 3rd party and online.

[shinsta312]

 

Finally now that it's been confirmed for the nth time and officially on video "this is the end of the GTA4 saga" well that is it PS3 fans, no hoping for a 3rd just for you. So look forward to the next GTA because after I have played with Gay Tony thats what I will be doing.

Yeah, the "GTA IV Saga" is referring to the episodes. There are only gonna be two episodes. It doesn't mean that it won't be ported to the other platforms, though.

[GuruAskew]

 

There is circumstantial evidence that the 50 million dollars was a LOAN if that is the case then the xbox camp are basically saying Rockstar gave away all rights to the DLC for free

 

Do you even understand how loans work?

 

It doesn't matter if you go into a pawn shop or to the biggest bank in the world, if someone loans you money they get something in return.

 

Usually it's interest but I think that even the dumbest person in the world would agree that even if the deal was a loan that exclusivity is the perk Microsoft was after when they gave a huge sum of money to a company that desperately needed it.

 

I've demonstrated time and time again how $50 million is more than cross-platform DLC would have made anyway when it comes to the bottom-line so it's very, very easy to see how Take-Two would have signed away all the rights to a relatively-small release 3 and a half years ago when they were hurting for money.

 

Whether it was an all-out payment or just a loan that $50 million was a lot of money for both parties (even Microsoft, it's not like you forget the value of a dollar when you're a huge business, especially when you have stockholders to answer to) and it helped Take-Two out of a bind, and again, you can rest assured that Microsoft got something more than your run-of-the-mill timed exclusivity out of it.

 

Furthermore, CharmingCharlie, just recently (page 36) you were STILL spouting off your "1 year" nonsense and you HAVE to admit that there's no evidence of that. Why won't you admit that the deal could lapse after 5? Um, I know, because you don't WANT to wait 5 years. 1 year is an easier pill to swallow (especially since you're already 8 months in) so you have yourself convinced, but I would love to see you admit that the 1-year deal is nothing more than wishful thinking because that's the truth.

[Ryder 556]

There is circumstantial evidence that the 50 million dollars was a LOAN if that is the case then the xbox camp are basically saying Rockstar gave away all rights to the DLC for free

 

Do you even understand how loans work?

 

It doesn't matter if you go into a pawn shop or to the biggest bank in the world, if someone loans you money they get something in return.

 

Usually it's interest but I think that even the dumbest person in the world would agree that even if the deal was a loan that exclusivity is the perk Microsoft was after when they gave a huge sum of money to a company that desperately needed it.

 

I've demonstrated time and time again how $50 million is more than cross-platform DLC would have made anyway when it comes to the bottom-line so it's very, very easy to see how Take-Two would have signed away all the rights to a relatively-small release 3 and a half years ago when they were hurting for money.

 

Whether it was an all-out payment or just a loan that $50 million was a lot of money for both parties (even Microsoft, it's not like you forget the value of a dollar when you're a huge business, especially when you have stockholders to answer to) and it helped Take-Two out of a bind, and again, you can rest assured that Microsoft got something more than your run-of-the-mill timed exclusivity out of it.

 

Furthermore, CharmingCharlie, just recently (page 36) you were STILL spouting off your "1 year" nonsense and you HAVE to admit that there's no evidence of that. Why won't you admit that the deal could lapse after 5? Um, I know, because you don't WANT to wait 5 years. 1 year is an easier pill to swallow (especially since you're already 8 months in) so you have yourself convinced, but I would love to see you admit that the 1-year deal is nothing more than wishful thinking because that's the truth.

They don't get "something" in return. They get all the money paid in full that they lent you. Say If i loaned you 100$ I wouldn't want a game back I would want that 100$ back as soon as possible. Not a game, not food, not anything but the money. That's how a loan works. And if you can't pay it back the bank(in this case M$) will reposes your stuff(M$ will take money straight from R*'s pockets and R* wont like loosing money on something M$ thought would of worked)

 

You have no evidence to support that the DLC is in fact remaining exclusive to the 360. M$ don't count. They're not making it. R* are. And R* would of crushed these rumors awhile ago and told us once and for all if it's exclusive or not. So far no word has come out of R*'s mouth. I don't even think R* responded to that rumor back in may about TLaD going to the PS3 on august 20th.

[CookPassBabtridge]

The loan theory would make sense if it wasnt so much money. A fraction of 50mil would have got the episodes made, and in light of Sony's lack of investment, probably would have bought some exclusivity time too. But 50 is insane, particualarly with nothing to compete with it from Sony.

 

Remember it was R* who touted the deal in the first place, and it wasnt about sharing content. MS played ball, Sony didnt. Only one party was going to gain the rights, or Rockstar would have just funded the DLC themselves and hoped for decent sales.

[Ryder 556]

The loan theory would make sense if it wasnt so much money. A fraction of 50mil would have got the episodes made, and in light of Sony's lack of investment, probably would have bought some exclusivity time too. But 50 is insane, particualarly with nothing to compete with it from Sony.

 

Remember it was R* who touted the deal in the first place, and it wasnt about sharing content. MS played ball, Sony didnt. Only one party was going to gain the rights, or Rockstar would have just funded the DLC themselves and hoped for decent sales.

Not all that insane. Like I said a few pages back M$ were riding on XP's success when the deal was made. So M$ probably could of bought EA if they wanted to then regretted it for blowing a few billion dollars. The same will happen when R* are forced to pay $50 million to M$ and regret ever doing business with them.

[CharmingCharlie]

 

Do you even understand how loans work?

 

It doesn't matter if you go into a pawn shop or to the biggest bank in the world, if someone loans you money they get something in return.

 

Usually it's interest but I think that even the dumbest person in the world would agree that even if the deal was a loan that exclusivity is the perk Microsoft was after when they gave a huge sum of money to a company that desperately needed it.

Yes I am quite knowledgeable on how loans work thank you very much and I have already stated that Microsoft did get something out of it. They got a 1 year exclusivity to the DLC which would have cost them millions to BUY. Instead they got that for free by providing an interest free loan to Rockstar.

 

 

I've demonstrated time and time again how $50 million is more than cross-platform DLC would have made anyway when it comes to the bottom-line so it's very, very easy to see how Take-Two would have signed away all the rights to a relatively-small release 3 and a half years ago when they were hurting for money.

Yes we are all aware of your Oliver Twist fantasy, you keep whittling on about it enough. You are totally blinded by your utter love for Microsoft that you think Take Two would sign over all rights for their work.

 

 

Whether it was an all-out payment or just a loan that $50 million was a lot of money for both parties (even Microsoft, it's not like you forget the value of a dollar when you're a huge business, especially when you have stockholders to answer to) and it helped Take-Two out of a bind, and again, you can rest assured that Microsoft got something more than your run-of-the-mill timed exclusivity out of it.

Really so if Microsoft got more than exclusivity out of it how come Microsoft were not allowed to release an OFFICIAL GTA 4 bundle on GTA 4's launch ? I mean surely if Microsoft had such "pull" they would have at least ensured they were the Official console of GTA 4. Yet guess what they weren't, it was the PS3 that was Officially bundled with GTA 4 and using GTA 4 artwork. Microsoft had to wait nearly a year later to release their Official bundle.

 

 

Furthermore, CharmingCharlie, just recently (page 36) you were STILL spouting off your "1 year" nonsense and you HAVE to admit that there's no evidence of that.  Why won't you admit that the deal could lapse after 5?  Um, I know, because you don't WANT to wait 5 years.  1 year is an easier pill to swallow (especially since you're already 8 months in) so you have yourself convinced, but I would love to see you admit that the 1-year deal is nothing more than wishful thinking because that's the truth.

There is no evidence that the DLC isn't a 1 year exclusive is there ? There is no evidence the DLC is exclusive to the Xbox for 5 years and there is no evidence to suggest that the DLC is exclusive to the Xbox for all eternity.

 

I have my reasons for believing it is a 1 year exclusive deal, you can think it is wishful thinking if you like. After all most of the bullsh*t you have been posting in here is wishful thinking from an xbox fanboy.

 

 

The loan theory would make sense if it wasnt so much money. A fraction of 50mil would have got the episodes made, and in light of Sony's lack of investment, probably would have bought some exclusivity time too. But 50 is insane, particualarly with nothing to compete with it from Sony.

Rockstar didn't borrow the money so they could make the DLC they borrowed the money so they could make GTA 4. They needed 50 million and Microsoft were prepared to loan them that. In return Microsoft would get it's 50 million BACK and get timed exclusivity to both DLC (something that is quite valuable if you think about it). In effect MS got exclusivity for NOTHING, they still get their 50 million back.

[agincourtsalute]

 

could it be that the deal with M$ prevents R* from breathing a word of DLC coming to other platforms ...

 

could it be that the deal with M$ prevents R* from ever releasing the DLC on PS3 and PC ...

Yes I agree that is one possibility, but I didn't hear you say that my theory could be possible.

 

As for you thinking that 18 months exclusivity on DLC of one of the most anticipated games ever as not worth much is ridiculous.

[CookPassBabtridge]

Charlie If it was for IV, that would be another story concerning rights. Microsoft investing half the dev costs but Sony still getting the port??

 

If all this is right about timed exclusives and loans, then Sony have sat on their arse and reaped rewards to the hilt. Which would not happen on any rival company's watch.

Edited October 16, 2009 by CookPassBabtridge

[CharmingCharlie]

 

^ If it was for IV, that would be another story concerning rights. Microsoft investing half the dev costs but Sony still getting the port??

You are getting too caught up in what they used the money for. Rockstar needed money to finish GTA 4 off. Now timed exclusivity to GTA 4 would have been incredibly expensive probably more than MS or Sony would be prepared to pay. So they came up with this DLC, but the DLC isn't worth a $50 million cheque. If they had sold timed exclusivity for the DLC they may have got $10/15 million at best.

 

So the alternative thing was to make it a loan. That way Rockstar got their 50 million which they needed to finish GTA 4 off. Microsoft in return basically got the timed exclusivity for FREE and would still get their 50 million back. That makes a hell of a lot more sense than "Microsoft paid 50 million for all eternity exclusivity to two bits of DLC".

 

As for Sony sitting on their arse and reaping their rewards ? Erm you don't think they got the rights to bundle GTA 4 with their console for free do you ? Microsoft got their timed exclusivity for the DLC which will have shifted consoles for them and still done a fair bit of damage to their competitor which is what MS wants to do. It does NOT make sense for Microsoft to just give Rockstar 50 million for all eternity exclusivity of the DLC, the only people that think it does are blinded xbox fanboys like Guru Askew.

[CookPassBabtridge]

But that depends how you are classing finishing IV off; IV on its own = R* are still short of the cash to make the episodes. If it was IV and the two DLCs, (which we only recently got confirmed as planned from the start,) then the amount would make more sense, yes. But to me that would give Sony even less of a look in with the exclusivity.

 

The other big question on that theory Charlie is why would Sony refuse to fund IV if R* had stalled due to lack of funds? (which I doubt).

[CharmingCharlie]

 

But that depends how you are classing finishing IV off; IV on its own = R* are still short of the cash to make the episodes. If it was IV and the two DLCs, (which we only recently got confirmed as planned from the start,) then the amount would make more sense, yes. But to me that would give Sony even less of a look in with the exclusivity.

Erm not sure what you mean here. I am not denying Rockstar didn't need money, GTA 4 was the most expensive game in history (well over $100 million to make I believe). In short they needed money to finish GTA 4 and get it onto the market so they could start making money from GTA 4. They could worry about how they would fund the DLC later on.

 

As it turned out GTA 4 sold very well, T2's own figures show 13million copies sold. So Rockstar just used some of the funds it earned from GTA 4 to make the DLC. Now with the DLC on the market any revenue from that DLC is going straight to Microsoft to pay off the 50 million loan.

 

 

The other big question on that theory Charlie is why would Sony refuse to fund IV if R* had stalled due to lack of funds? (which I doubt).

Your guess is as good as mine, but I remember at the time Sony weren't showing much interest in Western Developers. I remember part of the reason Rockstar went to Microsoft was down to the fact they couldn't communicate with the guys in charge.

[Insane Kane]

why is this still going on and on ? they just said in the new GTTV that this stuff is exclusive give it a rest seriously.

[simonp92]

why is this still going on and on ? they just said in the new GTTV that this stuff is exclusive give it a rest seriously.

You might wanna watch it again.

[XZGamer71]

why is this still going on and on ? they just said in the new GTTV that this stuff is exclusive give it a rest seriously.

You might wanna watch it again.

I also don't think i heard anything about Exclusitivity. Even though i have a PS3 i don't think this will be coming Oh well You Xboxers enjoy it.

 

/Cheesyspeach.

[CookPassBabtridge]

@Charlie, the way you worded your earlier post, sounded like youre saying R* were short of money to get the game finished, which Im sure wasnt the case. Particularly when the DLCs were planned alongside it. The whole project would have been budgeted to the letter even to get off the ground.

[Insane Kane]

why is this still going on and on ? they just said in the new GTTV that this stuff is exclusive give it a rest seriously.

You might wanna watch it again.

I also don't think i heard anything about Exclusitivity. Even though i have a PS3 i don't think this will be coming Oh well You Xboxers enjoy it.

 

/Cheesyspeach.

he used the word exclusive period even if he didnt say "its exclusive only for 360" still used the word, i just dont know why everyones ranting about it on and on if it comes to ps3 good if it dont ok then it doesnt but the deal was made long ago for it to be for 360 never have i heard them say about ps3 or making a deal with sony.

 

I will enjoy

[simonp92]

^ well none of us know for sure. and one of us will look like a fool when rockstar anounnce EFLC for PC and PS3. haha

[foohy]

@Charlie, the way you worded your earlier post, sounded like youre saying R* were short of money to get the game finished, which Im sure wasnt the case. Particularly when the DLCs were planned alongside it. The whole project would have been budgeted to the letter even to get off the ground.

Maybe the $50mil was part of that 'to-the-letter' budget? Not to mention any budget plans kind of got overrun when they delayed the game by 6 months.

 

Let's face it; GTA keeps R* afloat. They funded IV with money from the Stories on PSP and PS2. That's why those games were made in the first place. However, that's not a lot to go on. It makes sense that they would need a loan to finish the most expensive game of all time.

[CookPassBabtridge]

"Maybe the $50mil was part of that 'to-the-letter' budget?" No, because if they were short by that much, it isnt a to-the-letter budget. No way would they start making a game with a 50million dollar hole in the budget and hope somebody bailed them out.

[adamcs]

 

why is this still going on and on ? they just said in the new GTTV that this stuff is exclusive give it a rest seriously.

Vice City was "exclusive" to PS2; San Andreas was "exclusive" to PS2; Chinatown Wars was "exclusive" to Nintendo DS, etc etc etc...

 

 

As I've said before, when Rockstar refuses to give a clear answer it means they are hiding something. If the DLC was never going to feature on other platforms, Rockstar would have made this fact clear at the beginning, to save the PC/PS3 fans some hassle. There would be no benefit to R* in keeping this fact a secret if it was true. There would also be no benefit to Microsoft.

 

It would be stupid at this stage, however, to announce plans to bring it to PC/PS3, as this would totally undermine the exclusivity. So we'll just have to wait I'm afraid. It could be a long time (sadly) but hopefully it's not.

[Jonny04]

Good luck guys, in the meantime is anyone playing Uncharted 2 or Forza 3. If so add me xxPH4NT0Mxx and we can have a bash at it.

 

Roll on 12 days!

[GuruAskew]

 

They don't get "something" in return. They get all the money paid in full that they lent you. Say If i loaned you 100$ I wouldn't want a game back I would want that 100$ back as soon as possible.

 

This is hilarious. I'd like to see the bank that lets you pay them back cent-for-cent regardless of how long it takes you to repay them.

 

 

Not a game, not food, not anything but the money. That's how a loan works. And if you can't pay it back the bank(in this case M$) will reposes your stuff(M$ will take money straight from R*'s pockets and R* wont like loosing money on something M$ thought would of worked)

 

That's why it's hilarious that people are over-simplifying it by saying it's a loan because it's not. It may have loan-like properties but this isn't a guy going into a bank to start a business. This is a deal worked out by two corporate entities and all the people who seize on the word "loan" and act like the episodes will be available elsewhere when the "debts are settled" are in for a rude awakening.

 

What is simple is that a deal of this magnitude has never happened in the world of video gaming, especially not with downloadable content, and as such anyone trying to downplay the significance of the deal is swimming against the stream

 

People bring up the timed exclusives on past GTA games and people try to act like $50 million isn't a huge sum of money for either party and people can't wrap their heads around the fact that Rockstar chose this deal rather than choosing to take their money but guess what? This deal is unprecedented and as such the broad strokes of the deal alone are enough to convince any unbiased and rational person that Microsoft has this content secured.

 

[agincourtsalute]

why is this still going on and on ? they just said in the new GTTV that this stuff is exclusive give it a rest seriously.

Vice City was "exclusive" to PS2; San Andreas was "exclusive" to PS2; Chinatown Wars was "exclusive" to Nintendo DS, etc etc etc...

 

 

As I've said before, when Rockstar refuses to give a clear answer it means they are hiding something. If the DLC was never going to feature on other platforms, Rockstar would have made this fact clear at the beginning, to save the PC/PS3 fans some hassle. There would be no benefit to R* in keeping this fact a secret if it was true. There would also be no benefit to Microsoft.

 

It would be stupid at this stage, however, to announce plans to bring it to PC/PS3, as this would totally undermine the exclusivity. So we'll just have to wait I'm afraid. It could be a long time (sadly) but hopefully it's not.

This is exactly what I'm thinking. It wouldn't have made sense for M$ to do a exclusive deal with R* to boost sales of their console, then have R* point out to the world that its just time exclusive so anybody who doesn't want to buy a 360 can just wait a year.

 

The possibility of DLC coming to PS3 and/or PC could have been cleared up once and for all unless M$ is preventing it.

[LUNATICBRAND0N]

They announced the exclusive content when they announced the game, its never going to PS3.

[shinsta312]

 

They announced the exclusive content when they announced the game, its never going to PS3.

"It's easy to say, but hard to prove."

 

That's pretty much the case here for this 42-page discussion.

[adamcs]

 

People bring up the timed exclusives on past GTA games and people try to act like $50 million isn't a huge sum of money for either party...

I didn't bring it up to justify content for PC/PS3, I brought it up to show that the term "exclusive" is easily misinterpreted. Some people see it as definitive proof that the content will not be developed for other platforms in the future.

 

If you are so sure that Microsoft has this content "secured", then why hasn't Rockstar made that clear? The details are very wishy-washy and always have been, which is why we have a 42-page thread here debating it. Are Rockstar deliberately trying to piss off their fans by keeping it a secret? What is the benefit (to anyone) of keeping it a secret?