All Nightmare Long Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 If They can put out a Call of Duty every year and sell millions, then why can't Rockstar do the same? Or even every other year? As long as its GTA, it has the R* logo, and I have the right console, I'll buy it. I'm sure others would too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayk1 Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 If They can put out a Call of Duty every year and sell millions, then why can't Rockstar do the same? Or even every other year? As long as its GTA, it has the R* logo, and I have the right console, I'll buy it. I'm sure others would too. GTA games stand for high quality, not quantity. I don't see why you would like this to change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All Nightmare Long Posted March 16, 2010 Author Share Posted March 16, 2010 If They can put out a Call of Duty every year and sell millions, then why can't Rockstar do the same? Or even every other year? As long as its GTA, it has the R* logo, and I have the right console, I'll buy it. I'm sure others would too. GTA games stand for high quality, not quantity. I don't see why you would like this to change. But the COD games have quality, if they didn't nobody would buy them right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Akavari Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 grand theft auto is nothing like call of duty. just because those games can be pumped out every year doesnt mean GTA can. making a grand theft auto is a delicate process, you have to create an entirely new living, breathing city. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DX2069 Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 If They can put out a Call of Duty every year and sell millions, then why can't Rockstar do the same? Or even every other year? As long as its GTA, it has the R* logo, and I have the right console, I'll buy it. I'm sure others would too. GTA games stand for high quality, not quantity. I don't see why you would like this to change. agreed GTA is known for being a good game and never looking like sh*t like most cod's do because they rush to get them out every year another good example of that would be the Smackdown! vs raw franchise Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kwandilibro Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 grand theft auto is nothing like call of duty. just because those games can be pumped out every year doesnt mean GTA can. making a grand theft auto is a delicate process, you have to create an entirely new living, breathing city. all you have to do for cod is copy old gameplay and add some new stuff, and make a new location. all the cod nerds love it no mater how repetitive it gets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SmC12 Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 I like C.O.D but their games are very repetitive. Whereas GTA is unique and plus it's a sandbox which COD isn't so it takes longer to make. I mean think about MW2 has what 25+ missions. GTA has over 100+(not including DLC) and also has free roam etc. built in with it. So basically you are getting a much better game with GTA because it has the missions and the free roam. But all this takes longer to make, but i think the wait is worth it don't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All Nightmare Long Posted March 16, 2010 Author Share Posted March 16, 2010 Then why do Call of duty games sell so well if they're noticeably rushed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentSeas Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 Then why do Call of duty games sell so well if they're noticeably rushed? Because its accessable to casual gamers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All Nightmare Long Posted March 16, 2010 Author Share Posted March 16, 2010 Alright I think I get it now. GTA is bigger than COD so it needs more time. I still believe they could pump out a decent installment (at least DLC) every year. It would most likely have to be the same city though. Don't get me wrong, I don't mind waiting, in fact I almost cherish the waiting and all the hype surrounding it. But this was always something that bugged me. I guess if I knew more about making a video game I would probably understand more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mokrie Dela Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 The more DLCs they make, the longer it'll take to make the next main GTA, as they'd be digressing from development to make DLC. Unless one of the other R* companies make the DLCs.... COD looks cool, but its a shooter - you don't even see/get to know the protag(s). its a game that is this "shoot." GTA has so many more complexities - a living, open world enviroment, radios, vehicles, different gameplay mechanics (driving shooting, running, jumping-off-a-sky-scraper-to-you're-black-and-white-death), free-roam, etc. a new GTA once every 2 years.... MAYBE, that'd be pushing it. I believe the makers of Alan Wake said this: "It'll be done when it's done." Says it all. but a new DLC once a year would be welcome untill the new GTA is out... IV's DLC's could have been longer, and if they made them around 40-50 missions i think that'd help fil the 2 year wait for the next one. You'd get the new gta, then the new gta point two The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing. Click here to view my Poetry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SammiiDoogles Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 Annualized games = drop in quality Although, saying that; Vice City was an absolute masterpiece and took only 9 months to make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash_735 Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 If They can put out a Call of Duty every year and sell millions, then why can't Rockstar do the same? Or even every other year? As long as its GTA, it has the R* logo, and I have the right console, I'll buy it. I'm sure others would too. Ok, I'm quoting the original post, no one has pointed out the contradiction. Call of Duty has a yearly release, yes, because they have TWO studios working on the game, each studio has two years at a time to work with. Infinity Ward - COD2, COD4, MW2 Treyarch - COD3, COD:WAW, COD due out this year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xcaliber81 Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 Alright I think I get it now. GTA is bigger than COD so it needs more time. I still believe they could pump out a decent installment (at least DLC) every year. It would most likely have to be the same city though. Don't get me wrong, I don't mind waiting, in fact I almost cherish the waiting and all the hype surrounding it. But this was always something that bugged me. I guess if I knew more about making a video game I would probably understand more. a good example of rushing a game is nfs undercover ea makes a nfs title every year then leaves the previous 1 all buggy maybe rockstar wants to put more of an effort, granted gta 4 has bugs but not like nfs does Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nova69_7 Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 Alright I think I get it now. GTA is bigger than COD so it needs more time. I still believe they could pump out a decent installment (at least DLC) every year. It would most likely have to be the same city though. Don't get me wrong, I don't mind waiting, in fact I almost cherish the waiting and all the hype surrounding it. But this was always something that bugged me. I guess if I knew more about making a video game I would probably understand more. a good example of rushing a game is nfs undercover ea makes a nfs title every year then leaves the previous 1 all buggy maybe rockstar wants to put more of an effort, granted gta 4 has bugs but not like nfs does Well Ive said it before and I will again. I'd rather play completely finished GTA then have them rush it out and be a complete dissapointment. I'm sure most people will agree with that. People wanna play a solid GTA game not an imcomplete one just coz fans demanded it be released before christmas or whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diesel311 Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 Not only that, but let's face it, MW2 online multiplayer is one of the most bug and glitch infested pieces of crap ever put out. It gets a pass though simply because of the name. I love the quality that goes into the GTA games. By the way, I own MW2 and enjoy online play, but the quality is nothing compared to GTA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronnyboy Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 Not only that, but let's face it, MW2 online multiplayer is one of the most bug and glitch infested pieces of crap ever put out. I disagree on many levels. It's only either due to hackers or modders, thanks to it's popularity. I think GTA 4's MP had bugs and glitches that were just as bad as MW2. I can not tell you how many times I have had modders, glitchers and be doing a race and a car will out of the blue pass me and win a race thanks to lag. Now that being said, GTA's are like a fine cake. They take a while to design, build, decorate, finalize and hype up. But when you first taste that cake, it's like eating heaven. Everyone loves it and appreciates it, and always wants more. Now take a game like NFS or COD where it's a cake you pick up really quick at the local Grocery Store Bakery. It's crappy, quickly made, and doesn't last long. But hey, it's sweet and it's a cake right? So you enjoy it for what it's for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Akavari Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 Ew f*ck no. They take features away from the vanilla game so they can put it in the DLC expansions and make you buy it. If it were just an extension of the story with a new protagonist and missions then I wouldn't see any problem with it. It was kinda interesting to see Johnny and Luis' perspectives on everything. It made Niko's story a lot more interesting because the countless, seemingly insignificant people they made you kill in the original game were actually acquaintances and friends of the other protagonists (Jason Michaels, Jim Fitzgerald). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Algonquin Assassin Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 I don't think I would like it if a GTA game was released every single year. Yeah I suppose in the last couple of years we've had GTA IV, CTW, and the two DLCs, but for main release titles there's been a nice break. Take NFS for example. The quality of the series has been going down hill ever since the games have been released annually. Sure they still sell quite well, but it's only because of the name. I don't want that to happen to GTA. I don't mind waiting 2 even 3 years for a GTA title, because I know it'll be worth the wait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phazar Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 Many people have hit it on the head: it's better to wait for a detailed and completed GTA than to rush it and it not being as good as it should have been. We need an announcement of GTA V, please! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mainland Marauder Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 Although, saying that; Vice City was an absolute masterpiece and took only 9 months to make. Bar's been raised considerably since then. VC had a small map with a good chunk of it being beach and while the storyline was engaging, it wasn't particularly original. I like the idea of getting a new proper GTA every 2-3 years with some DLC and handheld stuff in between. Rockstar ain't no EA, and thank God. "You tell me exactly what you want, and I'll explain to you very carefully why it cannot be." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the nameless Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 I don't want that to happen to GTA. I don't mind waiting 2 even 3 years for a GTA title, because I know it'll be worth the wait. When you say this though, I didn't think IV was worth the wait at all, in fact, if it was not for multiplayer, I'd still be playing through the San An story again. I played it through when it first came out, was kind of underwhelmed with the story and characters, and played through it again recently (a few months ago) for the trophies. OK, I probably agree that it should not be released every year, but I thought they start on the next one just before the current one is released? If so, then they are almost 2 years into developing the next one. This should be a good enough point to give us some details - even a confirmation that it will be made. As for the schedule, RDR is set for may 2010, and agent set for later in 2010, there is no chance of a GTAV 2010 release, surely the hype of an anouncement won't detract people from buying RDR or Agent. So why not give us an anouncement at e3 in june 2010, a release date of april 2011 (pushed back to october) then they would have the main focus on games, and their rivals will be in the cold. If people are playing rdr, that will be thier main game until agent, which will be thier main game until GTA:V. And what about people who don't want to play a western game or agent - like me? Surely not everyone is interested in rdr or agent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lazy Squirrel PT Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 Well even if they could put out a new GTA every year or so, it would get old really quick. People don't always play the same game you know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d0mm2k8 Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 CoD is made by about 3-4 different developers now making it easier to bring them out more often. And CoD is a linear FPS with a short and crappy story, not a huge sandbox game with a long story. Two completely different games Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WF the Hobgoblin Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 I agree with most people in that don't want R* North to churn out a new half a*sed gta every year. However, as mentioned before, COD has two developers: An awesome developer (IW) and a crap one (Treyarch). Which means you still have to wait a few years between the good cod games. Infinity Ward pushes forward and then Treyarch gets to take IW's work, take a step back and add a few gimmicks. I still liked WAW, but that's because MW1 was so awesome that even a game similar is still decent. To the point now. What if another R* developer started making gta games while North and NY etc got to work on the next proper game? I'd love to see more stories set in IV's Liberty City or even the GTA3 cities again. I dont thave a psp but I bought both the "Stories" games for ps2. I thought they were great and definitely filled the gap between SA and IV. And I think you could expect a certain quality knowing that it was still R* making it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mokrie Dela Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 EA are a perfect example of greed and incompetence. They make a game every year to get more money. Take Fifa for example. They could release updates that change the game, new kits squads etc but no. They make it look pretty but it has absolutely**** AI, so unstable. NFS too, in my experiance is the same. I actually threw the series away after Carbon. I'd had enough. If EA ever did buy Take two like they tried, GTA WOULD turn into an annual release, with all the things that make it good gone. Rockstar aren't as greedy as EA thankfully, so they will release a solid game. The only instance i will say otherwise is the DLCs - very good, but especially tBOGT, you can see they just hashed it up, if they took more time on it it'd be even better. I also don't think the DLC's were released just for more money - R* always planned for them and ii suspect they knew what they were going to do with them from the off. I think the best outome would be : A new GTA. Then a year later a DLC (a longer one). then a year later maybe another DLC... then the next GTA. But perhaps this would only be do-able if there was a 2nd studio working on the DLC, as mentioned with COD.... The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing. Click here to view my Poetry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d0mm2k8 Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 An awesome developer (IW) and a crap one (Treyarch) Not to start a flame war or anything but you've got that the wrong way round buddy. MW2 is sh*te compared to WaW, a lot less brutal and less PC support. Enough off-topic fanboyism from me now. Activision have two new developers working on two different CoD titles as well as Trey and IW. Sledgehammer Games and an unnamed studio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emotion98.3 Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 Thats what happens when a GTA is made in a 1-2 year lifespan....have fun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheat Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 Thats what happens when a GTA is made in a 1-2 year lifespan....have fun Yeah. That's pretty much it. R* made VC, SA and III so quickly because they used the same engines, but with Euphoria and all the other stuff it is most likely to take 3-4 years and I'm glad. It's always gon' be so much better. Rockstar ain't no EA, and thank God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diesel311 Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 Well put Emotion98.3 for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now