Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!

    2. News

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. News
      2. Red Dead Online
    1. GTA Online

      1. After Hours
      2. Find Lobbies & Players
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Vehicles
      5. Content Creator
      6. Help & Support
    2. Crews

      1. Events
      2. Recruitment
    1. Grand Theft Auto Series

    2. GTA Next

    3. GTA V

      1. PC
      2. Guides & Strategies
      3. Help & Support
    4. GTA IV

      1. Episodes from Liberty City
      2. Multiplayer
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
      5. GTA Mods
    5. GTA Chinatown Wars

    6. GTA Vice City Stories

    7. GTA Liberty City Stories

    8. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    9. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    10. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    11. Top Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    12. Wiki

      1. Merchandising
    1. GTA Modding

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Mod Showroom

      1. Scripts & Plugins
      2. Maps
      3. Total Conversions
      4. Vehicles
      5. Textures
      6. Characters
      7. Tools
      8. Other
      9. Workshop
    3. Featured Mods

      1. DYOM
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Red Dead Redemption

    2. Rockstar Games

    1. Off-Topic

      1. General Chat
      2. Gaming
      3. Technology
      4. Programming
      5. Movies & TV
      6. Music
      7. Sports
      8. Vehicles
    2. Expression

      1. Graphics / Visual Arts
      2. GFX Requests & Tutorials
      3. Writers' Discussion
      4. Debates & Discussion
    1. Forum Support

    2. Site Suggestions

Rafae

GTAV most profitable entertainment product ever.

Recommended Posts

Guest
Posted (edited)

@demonicspaceman, good read, but there are some flaws in your calculations. First, we have to keep the time parameters the same for comparison, so about 95 years are invalid. We're talking about what entity had a higher profit margin, not who made the highest as amount of money.

So it's how much they spend vs how much they earn within GTA V's life cycle up to this point. NFL pays out literal tons of money in NFL player/staff contracts, scholarships, travel, hotel rooms, stadiums, lawsuits, advertisements, retired and debilitated players, physical rehab, mental rehab, drug rehab, induction ceremonies, anniversary parties, too much to include honestly. There are way more NFL players vs r* employees and they make millions more each

I know it's hard to believe that a company that sells jerseys with $8 worth of material at $115+ wouldn't be the most profitable company ever, but maybe it doesn't count towards entertainment at all.

For example, WWE is called "sports entertainment" so they can't be sued for advertising competition while being scripted. They are obligated to differentiate their product from more legitimate sports even though they both involve incredible athleticism. Just food for thought

Why do we have to keep the time parameters the same? Nobody claimed GTA was the most profitable product ever over a 4 year time span.

 

The rest, I just don't care about. You're pinpointing. If doing that, as previously said, GTA is the most profitable anything ever with a middleaged retired criminal, black man, dog and psycho on the box art to ever have been released in Guam.

 

Edit: On second thoughts - higher profit margin? You know that street performer who walked to town, wears clothes given to him and basically has no overheads but receives $100 a day in donations, his profit margin would be higher than GTA's in a single day, by quite a lot. Is this entertainment product void from discussion too?

 

WWE isn't called sports entertainment to avoid being sued. It's been sports entertainment since the 80s and they explained the change and reasons back in the 80s. Nothing about being sued (seriously, people really need to check legal sh*t out before posting tripe). It stops them being subject to regulation (i.e. they can use all the roids they want). It's also a clever marketing term coined by VM.

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shadowfennekin

Doesn't help it's on 5 different platforms.....

 

I'm excited for RDR 2 yet scared at the same time that they'll f*ck over SP to focus on Online. Even killing a promise for SP DLC for Online stuff.... like they did with this. I'd like them to break a legal promise for SP DLC... see what happens then C*.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Le biatch

Doesn't help it's on 5 different platforms.....

 

I'm excited for RDR 2 yet scared at the same time that they'll f*ck over SP to focus on Online. Even killing a promise for SP DLC for Online stuff.... like they did with this. I'd like them to break a legal promise for SP DLC... see what happens then C*.

I honestly don't see how a dlc could've been implemented in SP. With the available options at the end, it wouldn't work out for the ones that picked either A or B.

 

I believe the story was always about family, new beginnings and closure. It's a form of lesson that expands 3 different ways. I mean seriously, which other video game includes a whole family and the option to either ignore or save them?

 

Idk about y'all but I picked C and in my save file, every time I switch to Michael he is with his family, says positive things to them, and he doesn't talk sh*t to anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
D9fred95
Posted (edited)

I mean seriously, which other video game includes a whole family and the option to either ignore or save them?

 

Red Dead Redemption, S3 of Telltale's TWD, Heavy Rain if you deliberately fail everything...

Edited by D9fred95

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sleepwalking

Doesn't help it's on 5 different platforms.....

 

I'm excited for RDR 2 yet scared at the same time that they'll f*ck over SP to focus on Online. Even killing a promise for SP DLC for Online stuff.... like they did with this. I'd like them to break a legal promise for SP DLC... see what happens then C*.

I was kinda disappointed with cancelled DLC's. Alien invasion dlc with a new post apocalypse Los Santos map would be great. Beat the new campaign, head to online and play with others in the post apocalypse map.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Le biatch

 

Doesn't help it's on 5 different platforms.....

 

I'm excited for RDR 2 yet scared at the same time that they'll f*ck over SP to focus on Online. Even killing a promise for SP DLC for Online stuff.... like they did with this. I'd like them to break a legal promise for SP DLC... see what happens then C*.

I was kinda disappointed with cancelled DLC's. Alien invasion dlc with a new post apocalypse Los Santos map would be great. Beat the new campaign, head to online and play with others in the post apocalypse map.This can quite possibly still happen and exactly what I was talking about. It would be the best way to wind down online before RDR2 finally drops in October.

Come on R*!!! I know you are watching these forums!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kenmy13999

Is it really the most profitable entertainment product ever?

Haven't read the thread but read another article that said that League of Legends and Pac Man (of all things) had earned more money, could've linked the article but it's not in English so I don't think there's any point in doing that. Not even sure it's correct either

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rafae

Is it really the most profitable entertainment product ever?

 

Yep.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kenmy13999

 

Is it really the most profitable entertainment product ever?

 

Yep.https://venturebeat.com/2017/03/06/nexon-courts-western-game-developers-with-creativity-pitch/view-all/

 

Here's a little quote from the article I linked but I don't know if it's accurate or anything

By way of comparison, were also running the numbers on how big Dungeon Fighter is at this point, just in terms of IP. Life to date gross revenues for Dungeon Fighter is $8.7 billion after 10 years. Guess what the biggest movie franchise of all time is? Star Wars. Life to date box office gross, thats $7.6 billion. Were a billion dollars bigger and were only 10 years old, a quarter as old. To me, that speaks to the power of playing the long game

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KWF1981
Posted (edited)

I honestly don't see how a dlc could've been implemented in SP. With the available options at the end, it wouldn't work out for the ones that picked either A or B.

I believe the story was always about family, new beginnings and closure. It's a form of lesson that expands 3 different ways. I mean seriously, which other video game includes a whole family and the option to either ignore or save them?

 

Idk about y'all but I picked C and in my save file, every time I switch to Michael he is with his family, says positive things to them, and he doesn't talk sh*t to anyone.

 

Ah, but RDR last time around with the Undead Nightmare DLC completely disregarded the initial story mode. Aside the map and mechanics, it was a new game entirely with it.

 

And as Franklin can't die in the story here, there was a rumour once that he and CJ from San Andreas could have links too. The Benny's/Lamar Lowrider missions could have easily been added to story or online, same for DDH, as Franklin could have hired the NPC's he used for other heists too. So many possibilities, IMO, had they chosen to add to tory mode.

Edited by KWF1981

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FrozenInferno

People keep lamenting the lack of single player DLC but let's be honest, we'd play through it once maybe twice and go right back to Online. Why would R* invest the time and effort into a single player DLC that would end up being consumed in a week or two and forgotten. Online is where the long term focus has been for basically everybody who plays the game and its been obvious for years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MisFit-138
Posted (edited)

 

 

@demonicspaceman, good read, but there are some flaws in your calculations. First, we have to keep the time parameters the same for comparison, so about 95 years are invalid. We're talking about what entity had a higher profit margin, not who made the highest as amount of money.

So it's how much they spend vs how much they earn within GTA V's life cycle up to this point. NFL pays out literal tons of money in NFL player/staff contracts, scholarships, travel, hotel rooms, stadiums, lawsuits, advertisements, retired and debilitated players, physical rehab, mental rehab, drug rehab, induction ceremonies, anniversary parties, too much to include honestly. There are way more NFL players vs r* employees and they make millions more each

I know it's hard to believe that a company that sells jerseys with $8 worth of material at $115+ wouldn't be the most profitable company ever, but maybe it doesn't count towards entertainment at all.

For example, WWE is called "sports entertainment" so they can't be sued for advertising competition while being scripted. They are obligated to differentiate their product from more legitimate sports even though they both involve incredible athleticism. Just food for thought

Why do we have to keep the time parameters the same? Nobody claimed GTA was the most profitable product ever over a 4 year time span.

 

The rest, I just don't care about. You're pinpointing. If doing that, as previously said, GTA is the most profitable anything ever with a middleaged retired criminal, black man, dog and psycho on the box art to ever have been released in Guam.

 

Edit: On second thoughts - higher profit margin? You know that street performer who walked to town, wears clothes given to him and basically has no overheads but receives $100 a day in donations, his profit margin would be higher than GTA's in a single day, by quite a lot. Is this entertainment product void from discussion too?

 

WWE isn't called sports entertainment to avoid being sued. It's been sports entertainment since the 80s and they explained the change and reasons back in the 80s. Nothing about being sued (seriously, people really need to check legal sh*t out before posting tripe). It stops them being subject to regulation (i.e. they can use all the roids they want). It's also a clever marketing term coined by VM.

 

Tripe? You're implying that chance of lawsuits has no effect on the decision to be called sports entertainment? So, they dont change the term but continue to make steroids mandatory, and there is no chance of being sued? Think harder. And yes, if they continued with kayfabe and advertised as legitimate competition, a class action lawsuit would well within the rights of the audience who paid money to watch a legitimate competition. Changing the identity from professional sports to sports entertainment with the sole intent of avoiding federal regulations is the same thing, avoiding lawsuits.

All I'm saying is, NFL is a league of franchises. Gta is a single game entry in a video game franchise. It isn't comparable. It's like "what product is more profitable, 1989 Batman or Disney? Every thing Disney has ever made across all forms of media vs one single movie?"

Paying attention to details is usually commended, not dismissed as "pinpointing". there has to be some parameters or prostitution wins hands down.

Edited by MisFit-138

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Giantsgiants

I think that for many people GTA Online is more than just a game. It's a hangout venue as well.

 

GTA Online in the 2010's is what MySpace was in the early 2000's. Everyone and their brother is using it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pedinhuh

I think that for many people GTA Online is more than just a game. It's a hangout venue as well.

 

GTA Online in the 2010's is what MySpace was in the early 2000's. Everyone and their brother is using it.

You accurately summed up my current experience with the game.

 

My Facebook is there but I don't talk with anyone except some folks in a single discussion group, I never had Twitter or Instagram and doesn't plan to, my Tinder is nothing but frustration.

 

So everyday I turn on the game and check what my friends are doing, or I go make some money or I go wreck sh*t on freeroam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Posted (edited)

 

 

 

@demonicspaceman, good read, but there are some flaws in your calculations. First, we have to keep the time parameters the same for comparison, so about 95 years are invalid. We're talking about what entity had a higher profit margin, not who made the highest as amount of money.

So it's how much they spend vs how much they earn within GTA V's life cycle up to this point. NFL pays out literal tons of money in NFL player/staff contracts, scholarships, travel, hotel rooms, stadiums, lawsuits, advertisements, retired and debilitated players, physical rehab, mental rehab, drug rehab, induction ceremonies, anniversary parties, too much to include honestly. There are way more NFL players vs r* employees and they make millions more each

I know it's hard to believe that a company that sells jerseys with $8 worth of material at $115+ wouldn't be the most profitable company ever, but maybe it doesn't count towards entertainment at all.

For example, WWE is called "sports entertainment" so they can't be sued for advertising competition while being scripted. They are obligated to differentiate their product from more legitimate sports even though they both involve incredible athleticism. Just food for thought

Why do we have to keep the time parameters the same? Nobody claimed GTA was the most profitable product ever over a 4 year time span.

 

The rest, I just don't care about. You're pinpointing. If doing that, as previously said, GTA is the most profitable anything ever with a middleaged retired criminal, black man, dog and psycho on the box art to ever have been released in Guam.

 

Edit: On second thoughts - higher profit margin? You know that street performer who walked to town, wears clothes given to him and basically has no overheads but receives $100 a day in donations, his profit margin would be higher than GTA's in a single day, by quite a lot. Is this entertainment product void from discussion too?

 

WWE isn't called sports entertainment to avoid being sued. It's been sports entertainment since the 80s and they explained the change and reasons back in the 80s. Nothing about being sued (seriously, people really need to check legal sh*t out before posting tripe). It stops them being subject to regulation (i.e. they can use all the roids they want). It's also a clever marketing term coined by VM.

 

Tripe? You're implying that chance of lawsuits has no effect on the decision to be called sports entertainment? So, they dont change the term but continue to make steroids mandatory, and there is no chance of being sued? Think harder. And yes, if they continued with kayfabe and advertised as legitimate competition, a class action lawsuit would well within the rights of the audience who paid money to watch a legitimate competition. Changing the identity from professional sports to sports entertainment with the sole intent of avoiding federal regulations is the same thing, avoiding lawsuits.

All I'm saying is, NFL is a league of franchises. Gta is a single game entry in a video game franchise. It isn't comparable. It's like "what product is more profitable, 1989 Batman or Disney? Every thing Disney has ever made across all forms of media vs one single movie?"

Paying attention to details is usually commended, not dismissed as "pinpointing". there has to be some parameters or prostitution wins hands down.

 

irrelevent WWE sh*t;

What laws do they break? Professional wrestling is commonly known to be kayfabe. It has been since way before VM coined the term sports entertainment. Are you saying all of those people who paid to go and see WM1 could sue WWE for being mislead? There are two main reasons why VW used the term Sports Entertainment - 1. Marketing. 2. To avoid restrictions placed in professional sports such as roids etc.

 

Avoiding federal investigations and law suits because of the juicing is not what you originally argued. So you're saying anyone who attended any WWE/WWF event (or other companies) before the '80s (pretty sure it was late '80s too but can't find an exact date) has grounds to sue because they were mislead? Anyone who attended WM1 could potentially have a law suit against WWE for being mislead? That's like trying to sue NBC for Friends not being real.

 

 

 

I made a video years ago while pissing around with mates, I posted it on youtube. 800k views later it's made me some money. It cost nothing to produce and about £0.10 to upload to YouTube if I allocate the bandwidth and offset against the cost of the broadband. My profit is around 10,000% and increases daily.

 

GTAV cost $265m to produce, not including 5 years of support and updates. It's made $6bn so far. If my quick maths are correct that's only about 2,200%. I've made almost 5 times as much profit with one video, one entertainment product.

 

Profit is generally a percentage (i.e. 20% profit on selling a used car, adding 10% to materials etc.). Percentage wise, GTA is not nearly as profitable as many other "entertainment products". Value wise, it's possibly up there however with no figures for the maintenance costs, it's impossible to say. The websites reporting on this have incomplete figures, claiming it's made 6bn and cost 265m not including microtransactions and not including update and maintenance costs. Even the 6bn "profit" figure does not add up with 90m units sold.

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Blasterman4EVER

GTAO helped shape Ready Player One, and Ready Player One will help shape new installments of GTA.

 

GTAO will morph into the ultimate, do-all online game, but by then it might be called something else.

 

I believe (you heard it here first) that eventually Rockstar will just release a Ready Player One style game, and it will simply be called:

"Rockstar"

 

You'll be able to do anything. Time travel. Be a cowboy. Be in a GTA world.

 

It'll be over a decade but Rockstar will ultimately lead the way towards producing the game to end all games, the game that will be and absorb all other games.

 

Rockstar is going to be the only gaming company capable of changing the world after their success with GTA V. They're the only company that will be able to afford to continue pushing the envelope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

GTAO will morph into the ultimate, do-all online game, but by then it might be called something else.

You mean something like "Everywhere"? If only an ex Rockstar employee (or higher up even) was working on such a game... we can dream...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MisFit-138
Posted (edited)

 

 

 

 

 

@demonicspaceman, good read, but there are some flaws in your calculations. First, we have to keep the time parameters the same for comparison, so about 95 years are invalid. We're talking about what entity had a higher profit margin, not who made the highest as amount of money.

So it's how much they spend vs how much they earn within GTA V's life cycle up to this point. NFL pays out literal tons of money in NFL player/staff contracts, scholarships, travel, hotel rooms, stadiums, lawsuits, advertisements, retired and debilitated players, physical rehab, mental rehab, drug rehab, induction ceremonies, anniversary parties, too much to include honestly. There are way more NFL players vs r* employees and they make millions more each

I know it's hard to believe that a company that sells jerseys with $8 worth of material at $115+ wouldn't be the most profitable company ever, but maybe it doesn't count towards entertainment at all.

For example, WWE is called "sports entertainment" so they can't be sued for advertising competition while being scripted. They are obligated to differentiate their product from more legitimate sports even though they both involve incredible athleticism. Just food for thought

Why do we have to keep the time parameters the same? Nobody claimed GTA was the most profitable product ever over a 4 year time span.

 

The rest, I just don't care about. You're pinpointing. If doing that, as previously said, GTA is the most profitable anything ever with a middleaged retired criminal, black man, dog and psycho on the box art to ever have been released in Guam.

 

Edit: On second thoughts - higher profit margin? You know that street performer who walked to town, wears clothes given to him and basically has no overheads but receives $100 a day in donations, his profit margin would be higher than GTA's in a single day, by quite a lot. Is this entertainment product void from discussion too?

 

WWE isn't called sports entertainment to avoid being sued. It's been sports entertainment since the 80s and they explained the change and reasons back in the 80s. Nothing about being sued (seriously, people really need to check legal sh*t out before posting tripe). It stops them being subject to regulation (i.e. they can use all the roids they want). It's also a clever marketing term coined by VM.

Tripe? You're implying that chance of lawsuits has no effect on the decision to be called sports entertainment? So, they dont change the term but continue to make steroids mandatory, and there is no chance of being sued? Think harder. And yes, if they continued with kayfabe and advertised as legitimate competition, a class action lawsuit would well within the rights of the audience who paid money to watch a legitimate competition. Changing the identity from professional sports to sports entertainment with the sole intent of avoiding federal regulations is the same thing, avoiding lawsuits.

All I'm saying is, NFL is a league of franchises. Gta is a single game entry in a video game franchise. It isn't comparable. It's like "what product is more profitable, 1989 Batman or Disney? Every thing Disney has ever made across all forms of media vs one single movie?"

Paying attention to details is usually commended, not dismissed as "pinpointing". there has to be some parameters or prostitution wins hands down.

irrelevent WWE sh*t;

What laws do they break? Professional wrestling is commonly known to be kayfabe. It has been since way before VM coined the term sports entertainment. Are you saying all of those people who paid to go and see WM1 could sue WWE for being mislead? There are two main reasons why VW used the term Sports Entertainment - 1. Marketing. 2. To avoid restrictions placed in professional sports such as roids etc.

 

Avoiding federal investigations and law suits because of the juicing is not what you originally argued. So you're saying anyone who attended any WWE/WWF event (or other companies) before the '80s (pretty sure it was late '80s too but can't find an exact date) has grounds to sue because they were mislead? Anyone who attended WM1 could potentially have a law suit against WWE for being mislead? That's like trying to sue NBC for Friends not being real.

 

 

 

I made a video years ago while pissing around with mates, I posted it on youtube. 800k views later it's made me some money. It cost nothing to produce and about £0.10 to upload to YouTube if I allocate the bandwidth and offset against the cost of the broadband. My profit is around 10,000% and increases daily.

 

GTAV cost $265m to produce, not including 5 years of support and updates. It's made $6bn so far. If my quick maths are correct that's only about 2,200%. I've made almost 5 times as much profit with one video, one entertainment product.

 

Profit is generally a percentage (i.e. 20% profit on selling a used car, adding 10% to materials etc.). Percentage wise, GTA is not nearly as profitable as many other "entertainment products". Value wise, it's possibly up there however with no figures for the maintenance costs, it's impossible to say. The websites reporting on this have incomplete figures, claiming it's made 6bn and cost 265m not including microtransactions and not including update and maintenance costs. Even the 6bn "profit" figure does not add up with 90m units sold.

 

Yes, absolutely. If enough people at Wrestlemania were under the impression that they were watching actual legitimate

'fair' competition, they could band together for a 'class action lawsuit' for false advertising. I can only assume the result would have been coining the term sports entertainment much earlier, or having a credits sequence in which the actors real names are presented: "HBK played by Micheal Hickenbottom", that or a disclaimer at the end stating that all character names and likenesses are purely coincidental, you know like all other television shows do. Kayfabe is not common knowledge, even less so before the term sports entertainment. What was common was the phrase "wrestling is fake", a phrase that has pretty much disappeared since the they started labeling themselves entertainment.

But frankly, thats all splitting hairs. All I was trying to point out is that there are major differences between GTA V, a single entry in a narrative driven piece of media from a video game franchise consumed via retail at a fixed price agreed vs every dollar a league of franchises and corporations make in advertising, merchandising deals that include multiple single entrees in a video game franchise. They aren't even comparable. To help illustrate this, I used the WWE thing because it's so more similar to NFL, yet also not comparable. The "which lawsuit is avoided" isnt as important "no longer the same catagory" ie WWE is no longer considered an actual competition, it's just sports entertainment. So when people are talking about the most entertaining competitions, WWE shouldn't come up. Just like when we're talking about most profitable piece of entertainment, "the NFL" shouldnt come up for a multitude of reasons. The most obvious to everyone but you being that the NFL, again, isnt "A(singular) Product(retail item)" as much as it is "a League of franchises pushing their individual brands through hundreds of thousands of individual products(stadium games, video games, jerseys, t-shirts, bobble heads, posters, official drink/snacks/candy, footballs, safety equipment and other officially licensed merchandise with an NFL sticker on it that has been around for almost a hundred years"

I dont see any valid comparison to be made other than yes, both are entertaining. Choose one NFL product if you want to compare. Saying everything with an NFL logo that makes profit all counts towards one individual product is ridiculously absurd. All your other "arguments" amount to baseless **** you pulled out of your ass. "My youtube video cost nothing but totally made some denomination of money, this totally disproves all the professional journalists, their editors and fact checkers, the profit measuring company that stated the report, their staff of fact checkers, ect." K, except 1# consumers dont pay per video, they dont pay at all. #2 your production cost is the price of the game, system, and electricity to run them, so if your saying that you made more than 2,200 percent of that cost off of YouTube advertising revenue, then I'm saying you are a liar. Also, where is your data on street performing? How much does a unit of street performing cost and how many units has it sold? Oh, right, more rhetorical bs you pulled from your rectum.

 

All I'm really saying is it isnt being included in their data as it isnt at all the same.

Edited by MisFit-138

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

There's no case there for various reasons however I'll not be going around in circles explaining them.

 

Professional Journalists? hahaha, that's cute.

 

Nobody has provided actual figures, complete figures, sources etc.

 

So what can we compare GTA V to? "Entertainment product" is a broad term, I'd class the NFL, WWE, FIFA etc. as an entertainment product. "Entertainment product" may not be the correct term to use here if it cannot be compared to other entertainment products out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ice_cold2016

Not bad for a small handful of Brits who had a vision and kept pushing that vision when nobody would listen to them or take them seriously.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MisFit-138
Posted (edited)

There's no case there for various reasons however I'll not be going around in circles explaining them.

 

Professional Journalists? hahaha, that's cute.

 

Nobody has provided actual figures, complete figures, sources etc.

 

So what can we compare GTA V to? "Entertainment product" is a broad term, I'd class the NFL, WWE, FIFA etc. as an entertainment product. "Entertainment product" may not be the correct term to use here if it cannot be compared to other entertainment products out there.

 

It isn't a broad term if you understand the context it's being used in.

Contextually, they are clearly talking about copies of a title sold as merchandise via retail stores and the gross sum of those sales.

 

What can we compare GTA V to? Other entertainment products sold in retail stores that can be measured in units sold. Usually has a price tag and title. It should be a "product" not in some huge gaping extrapolated generalization of the term, but in the context used in all the reports, ie: the end result of a production/manufacturing process. Probably comes in a package, unless it's a book.

 

Pretty simple really, A book, A movie, A video game. Which is what is being reported btw. When then they say "GTA V is more profitable than Star Wars" they are talking specifically about each individual Star Wars movie and their independent sales numbers, not the "Star Wars Brand" and every plastic knick-knack in it.

 

So if you want to stay in the NFL wheelhouse, your choices are essentially a Madden title, bloopers videos, retail copies of a Superbowl, or I suppose NFL package subscriptions. Hats and jerseys are probably their best selling items, but they aren't entertainment product, they're clothing product.

 

The context of the term "entertainment product" as it's used in the all reports is pretty clear, you have to be looking to dismiss it to think otherwise. Just like you are willing to dismiss every single person involved in a professional capacity in this with "journalists? Thats cute". So what, you think that Rockstar made it up for some arbitrary fluff piece, called "the press" and everyone on the other end just exclaimed "really? I'll punch up the headline right now!" and everyone just followed suit? Not one person said "can we verify the validity of this claim"? Even though it is literally their job description? That's not how reporting works, no matter how much you want it to be the case. Your dismal of journalist is essentially "all news is fake! I refuse to believe information that disagrees with my bias". So, you know...dumb.

 

You're definitely running in circles, but you havent explained anything. You really havent said anything worth saying at all. Just empty conjecture, baseless rhetoric, counter-productive counter-arguments, and just generally moving your arguments laterally, never making progress yet refusing to recede. All because you dont know the difference between a product and a company that produces content.

Edited by MisFit-138

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Clearly they are saying "entertainment product" which covers, I don't know, every single product of entertainment in the history of the universe. Every song, every album, every dvd, every movie, every stage show, every tour, every concert, every tv show, every horse race, every poker game, you get the point. It's a very f*cking broad term when left undefined.

 

Limiting this to "copies of a title sold as merchandise via retail stores and the gross sum of those sales" removes a whole bunch of entertainment products. Is it not entertainment to see your favourite singer perform on stage live? What about an entire festival, not entertainment?

 

The context of "entertainment product" is not clear at all. As I stated earlier, if "entertainment product" is limited to just those which feature a black man, dog, psycho and middle aged man on the advertisements then sure, it's going to be the most profitable. None of the articles specify what this "entertainment product" term covers - you have, in your own words, pulled that from your ass.

 

Please, feel free to link me to an article by one of these "professional journalists" where they have clearly defined what constitutes as a "entertainment product".

 

My "dismissal of journalist" is based on the piss poor quality of every single article I have read regarding this along with the piss poor quality of other articles produced by the same company, website or journalist. "Fake news" is irrelevant. The fact that the articles all stem from what Doug Creutz told Marketwatch, and if you look at that it's estimated figures and sales figures not profit yet these articles that imply (or state in some cases) differently. This is why I laugh at the claims of "professional journalists".

 

I'm not saying, nor have I implied Rockstar have provided some fluff piece. I'm saying the parameters regarding the piece are unclear. However, it isn't as if there's any kind of history with Rockstar doing such a thing... is there?...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MisFit-138

^^Nope. You're just being stubbornly obtuse. On one hand you're saying the term "entertainment product" is too general and vague yet when parameters are provided its dismissed as "pinpointing". There are context clues in all of the articles, like the term "units sold". Common sense says we can exclude Fifa, WWE, NFL, (and any other corporate entity you decided to summarize as mearly "a product") from the conversation as they cant be measured in units sold. If you could, how much is the average fan willing to pay per unit, seeing as it's free to watch on network tv. This detail is important as it renders comparison impossible.

 

Another context clue is how they're using "product", as a retail item that can be measured in units sold. That means it's the "product" of manufacturing. "But that excludes a lot of entertainment products" yup, a lot of entertainment products that can and should be categorized differently as they are bought and engaged differently. Again, you are the only person who is having a problem understanding.

 

"That's just an estimation" yeah...based on data, from a company that exists solely to compile data and measure profitability. It's not some empty guess.

 

"Fake news" a stupid, empty phrase that always translates to "I cant prove this wrong with fact or logic, so I'm just going to dismiss it cause I want to". If it's fake, wheres the "real news"? Wheres "the other side" of this story? There isnt one single journalist whose willing to blow this wide open? The fact there are no conflicting reports from opposing news organizations and no retractments, it's a safe bet that an investigation revealed this to be an accurate claim.

 

Why hasn't the NFL or some street performer stepped in with bunch of piegraphs and charts crying "no, we're the most profitable product"? Nobody saying anything like that because nobody else has a problem with these reports. Lol

 

But I get it, you "dont care about any of that" so you just keep on believing the wacky bs you believe. Ignore all reports, facts, details, context, context clues, and abandon all common sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Blasterman4EVER
Posted (edited)

So a good question would be:

 

Is the Grand Theft Auto series more profitable than the Star Wars series?

Edited by Blasterman4EVER

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Giantsgiants
Posted (edited)

I just saw this fact on Ripley's Believe It or Not. 😯

 

20180613_Cartoon.jpg

Edited by Giantsgiants

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.