Has Michael Unsworth left Rockstar Games?

[Ballbreaker_]

5 hours ago, .Smaher. said:

Has anyone even brought up the very real possibility that he didn’t quit, he’s just in the process of being promoted to another position.

 

If I read correctly, the IGN article said that he "reportedly" left, and that they were still in the process of confirming it with Rockstar. Don't know if the article was updated.

Edited August 29, 2023 by FamousActor_

[Guest]

Has there been any confirmation that he’s actually left yet?

[sanjay3207]

3 hours ago, DarkDayz said:

Has there been any confirmation that he’s actually left yet?

IGN reached out to Rockstar. We haven't received any official confirmation yet.

[.Smaher.]

5 hours ago, FamousActor_ said:

 

If I read correctly, the IGN article said that he "reportedly" left, and that they were still in the process of confirming it with Rockstar. Don't know if the article was updated.

They only said that because of what’s on the LinkedIn page. They know about as much as anyone else.

[Yutes of Cards]

You know he and the Housers brothers wouldn't leave if Rockstar would just god damn remove Take 2 and treat their fans with more respect. you know its best to actually step up and remove take 2 from rockstar  right now!

[FannoF]

3 hours ago, Yutes of Cards said:

You know he and the Housers brothers wouldn't leave if Rockstar would just god damn remove Take 2 and treat their fans with more respect. you know its best to actually step up and remove take 2 from rockstar  right now!

As if that is possible...

[sanjay3207]

3 hours ago, Yutes of Cards said:

You know he and the Housers brothers wouldn't leave if Rockstar would just god damn remove Take 2 and treat their fans with more respect. you know its best to actually step up and remove take 2 from rockstar  right now!

T2 owns rockstar. So no, they can't. 

[your best pal]

let's cheer up, the end of R* as most of us know it only means the start of something new.

 

I mean, who wants to be a rockstar when you can for example build a rocket, boy?!

and whatever dan is up to certainly beats dealing with people like strauss - people from the board who know sh*t but want to intervene and be hands-on, change things just as they see fit.

 

back OT, unsworth! freebird now - he joined the flock. good for him really!

 

[DisCrafted]

You're right. "Build an NFT Boy" is definitely making something special.

Spoiler

 

Edited August 30, 2023 by DisCrafted

[Franc_1397]

14 hours ago, Yutes of Cards said:

You know he and the Housers brothers wouldn't leave if Rockstar would just god damn remove Take 2 and treat their fans with more respect. you know its best to actually step up and remove take 2 from rockstar  right now!

How are they supposed to "remove" their parent company? 

[Jason]

3 hours ago, your best pal said:

let's cheer up, the end of R* as most of us know it only means the start of something new.

 

I mean, who wants to be a rockstar when you can for example build a rocket, boy?!

and whatever dan is up to certainly beats dealing with people like strauss - people from the board who know sh*t but want to intervene and be hands-on, change things just as they see fit.

 

back OT, unsworth! freebird now - he joined the flock. good for him really!

 

 

Benzies is building a metaverse game that was once filled to the brim with NFT's only for them to quickly and quietly remove them. Further, BARB are backed by a myriad of investors who will be expecting their money back one way or another.

 

As for Dan, from what we've seen he's set up what is for all intents and purposes an entertainment publisher where he will work with creators to help them develop, market and release their projects, be it video games, tv, film or graphic novels. He's not making his own games as far as we know and personally I doubt he will make anything at any decent scale ever again.

 

To me it looks like Dan left cause he got tired and wanted out, probably to spend more time w/ his family seeing as I doubt those 100 hour work weeks were ideal. It'll be the same for a lot of these people who have left R*, Urnsworth possibly too if he has left. There was a story the other day about a small studio who had produced back to back to back critical indie hits with their latest being their best yet, only for them to shutter the studio because the founders were absolutely exhausted and rather than committing another 3-5 years to another project they decided to up and call it quits to spend time w/ their family.

 

The video game industry is absolute hell to work in cause of the hours involved.

[Leonida Man]

19 minutes ago, Jason said:

There was a story the other day about a small studio who had produced back to back to back critical indie hits with their latest being their best yet, only for them to shutter the studio because the founders were absolutely exhausted and rather than committing another 3-5 years to another project they decided to up and call it quits to spend time w/ their family.

Team Cherry have a couple years of silence going by now and I expect exactly that. They are going to release a masterpiece and close shop. 

When I was younger I thought being an indie developer was a more relaxed way to make a game, only you had less resources. Then started hearing true horror stories like one of the devs of Night in the Woods nearly dying of exhaustion and stress in the final stretch before release and man. It's not worthy to subject yourself to that even if the game is gourmet stuff.

[Jason]

Yea indie development has some of the worst crunch because as you're often self employed it's very easy to fall into the trap of your life = your job.

 

I said this earlier in the thread but we're very likely going to get a lot of well known industry figures retiring over the next few years. Plenty of them are getting into their late 40's or even 50's and have families they've neglected for years.

 

It's the same reason why a lot of the more day to day talent (developers, artists etc) often don't last long in the industry, they hit their 30's and start a family and realise that 60-80 work weeks for pay they can better elsewhere (with less hours) isn't what they want for their life.

 

All that plus studios tendency to scale down as they start a project and slowly scale up as the project develops has resulted in the games industries famously high turn over. It loses sh*t tons of talent and while R* is one of the rare studios that has been able to retain a lot of their talent (BGS is another) they're now hitting the point where the aging out / retirement part is coming.

[Dick Justice]

I wonder if Unsworth left because VI's script is done -- good time to make a clean break before pre-production on the next project fully takes off. I'm not overly concerned, whoever wrote the Wyman rant should be promoted. 

[Jason]

9 hours ago, Dick Justice said:

I wonder if Unsworth left because VI's script is done -- good time to make a clean break before pre-production on the next project fully takes off. I'm not overly concerned, whoever wrote the Wyman rant should be promoted. 

 

It is my assumption that his work, or the vast majority of it, is done, meaning he was able to step away with the least amount of impact on the studio. Perhaps he's still a call away for any touch ups or something but if VI is 12-18 months away then R* are also getting to the point where development on the next next project will enter early development and that's another 5 or so year process, so if he has left now is the time to leave probably.

[Spider-Vice]

13 hours ago, Leonida Man said:

Then started hearing true horror stories like one of the devs of Night in the Woods nearly dying of exhaustion and stress in the final stretch before release and man. It's not worthy to subject yourself to that even if the game is gourmet stuff.

That game's development was cursed in more than one way as well, considering their lead programmer (and also a friend of the team) was involved in a harassment case and ended up taking his own life.

[Rucke]

17 hours ago, Dick Justice said:

I wonder if Unsworth left because VI's script is done -- good time to make a clean break before pre-production on the next project fully takes off. I'm not overly concerned, whoever wrote the Wyman rant should be promoted. 

The script for GTA VI was probably written back in 2014/2015. You can't really go into full development until the script for the main story is completed. I seem to recall that GTA VI went into full development back in 2016. 

 

It was more likely the script for Red Dead Redemption III or some other major game. I still find it a little odd that he left before the release of GTA VI. Would you not want to stick around for that when you have worked on the game for many years?

Edited August 31, 2023 by Rucke

[Catsooey]

8 hours ago, Spider-Vice said:

That game's development was cursed in more than one way as well, considering their lead programmer (and also a friend of the team) was involved in a harassment case and ended up taking his own life.

That sounds like a pretty bad scene. Almost like the making of The Exorcist. You know when the whole production and set have to be exorcised, something has gone wrong. I never played A Night in the Woods though. I’ll have to check it out.

[Sneaky Queeky]

So much rubber stamping from the same crowd! Most of them moderators who you can't put in your ignore list. 

 

"So what?"

 

Here's so what, maybe some of us support the creative minds behind the brand rather than the brand itself. The minds who made the brand what it is, rather than just the logo. But so what, right?  

 

Do you think if Vince Gilligan and Peter Gould left half way through Breaking Bad's run it would have still been the same show, irregardless of the hundreds of people working on it? Delusional. David Chase and the Sopranos? Even more ignorant. 

 

It's these sort of once in a lifetime larger-than-life creative minds who construct the tone and direction of these projects that matter as much as the programmers on the ground floor, and that's why we're all here; because GTA and Rockstar games have a unique voice and style.

 

Turnover is inevitable, but it's absolutely understandable for some of us to be cautious, and belittling us for that caution doesn't make you sound as smart as you think.

 

But continue to parrot the same hostile positivity, it won't get you anywhere other than more posts to hide. 

 

Oh, and no mention of Lazlow in this thread is as ignorant as can be. 

Edited August 31, 2023 by SneakyDeaky

[Sneaky Queeky]

On 8/27/2023 at 4:03 PM, Jimbatron said:

Personally I’d be inclined to say there is more complacency that it won’t matter AT ALL.

 

Maybe there’s been some friction, maybe there hasn’t. But I don’t think it can be discounted as a possibility - unless someone has some genuine inside information that categorically says that’s not the case. It would be unusual if there wasn’t in big business.

 

I can buy it’s also possible departures are on good terms (not knowing anything about the personalities) - it could be burn out, wanting a break or to do something different. But even if the reason for leaving is benign, there’s also the impact after they are gone.

 

We perennially get the argument wheeled out that there’s a whole team of people as if no one realises that. Yes, it doesn’t mean there’ll be a sudden absence of talent. But leadership matters, and if Unsworth is moving on that’s two of the top three guys gone is a relatively short space of time. Change in leadership almost always involves some change in direction.
 

You could argue that might be a good thing - keeping things fresh, etc. That may turn out to be the case. But when you have a team that’s so good (produces the superlative RDR2 story for example), the phrase that comes to mind to me is - “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”: i.e if it were a simple matter of choice, I’d feel more confident the next story is in good hands if the same guys were still in charge. New leadership will be an unknown quantity.

 

The top team changing for me represents a risk (if you like the stories they’ve led the production of), not something that should be dismissed as nothing to worry about. Yes, it could work out fine, but there’s no reason to think that’s the default outcome either.

A wonderful and honest comment, ignored by the the same kool aid drinkers. 

[Ballbreaker_]

The definitive answer for these concerns will be given only when GTA 6 releases. For now it's nearly impossible to make a factual judgement, all of the arguments have their share of validity.

[Jason]

I feel the need to repeat my self;

 

Urnsworth leaving would have an impact on R* on their games. Why he's left is none of our business and fearmongering over it when the reasons could be entirely personal is a bad f*cking look that has no place on this forum. The impact on what him leaving would be on R* and their games is a point of discussion but one that, when combined with fearmongering, is an ultimately pointless line of discussion as the timing of his leaving likely means his work on VI is done which would mean we would only feel the impact of his departure with their next next game, which could be around 2030. Hard to say what the future will hold that far out given how many variables will be in play, innit?

 

This isn't aimed at anyone in particular, because if someone had an issue with any posts I've personally made in this thread I would fully expect them to have the balls to address me personally instead of just making a post filled with ad hominem and personal attacks, in what was a perfectly civil discussion, aimed at vague descriptions of who they have an issue with.

 

:^)

[Sneaky Queeky]

2 hours ago, Jason said:

I feel the need to repeat my self;

 

Urnsworth leaving would have an impact on R* on their games. Why he's left is none of our business and fearmongering over it when the reasons could be entirely personal is a bad f*cking look that has no place on this forum. The impact on what him leaving would be on R* and their games is a point of discussion but one that, when combined with fearmongering, is an ultimately pointless line of discussion as the timing of his leaving likely means his work on VI is done which would mean we would only feel the impact of his departure with their next next game, which could be around 2030. Hard to say what the future will hold that far out given how many variables will be in play, innit?

 

This isn't aimed at anyone in particular, because if someone had an issue with any posts I've personally made in this thread I would fully expect them to have the balls to address me personally instead of just making a post filled with ad hominem and personal attacks, in what was a perfectly civil discussion, aimed at vague descriptions of who they have an issue with.

 

:^)

I don't necessarily have a problem with you exactly, and considering I now only have one ball left, after this week- not that it has anything to do with this- I find the provocation slightly, to get personal, provocative. 

 

In plain speaking, I'm sick and tired of the constant, uncivilized response to fans's constant negative opinion, towards Take 2, IE Rockstar Games, since at least 2014; and it has been a constant theme among the moderators and admins on this wonderful message board, for some time, to display a lack of coherence and empathy towards the fans, while constantly humping the rainbow instead of showing any semblance of consensus and engagement with some of the die-hard fans who may have an alternative opinion to the run-of=the-mill experience with the current product.

 

Writing posts like "Who cares?" is about as tone deaf as it gets! And although this is not an official forum, what are we supposed to do other than feel picked on by "moderators," people of presumed authority, who feel the need to flex, almost unconditionally, whenever a user voices their concern regarding the company's direction? It's like a reflex with some of you! Grow up! It's just a brand! Feel free to repeat the same to me; there are bright, shiny mirrors installed in this dosshouse too, like any other. 

 

Rockstar don't pay for your dinner, man, so what is the hootenanny all about here?!  We all have a somewhat subjective opinion regarding Rockstar games and the future of their product and with so much turnover and upheaval, changes in tone and execution are completely natural, but what I can't accept is the constant "hostile positivity" towards any of us for showing any kind of caution at the direction of the company as a whole. Things change, but that doesn't necessarily mean we have to like it. 

Edited September 1, 2023 by Sneaky Queeky

[Jason]

4 hours ago, Sneaky Queeky said:

I don't necessarily have a problem with you exactly, and considering I now only have one ball left, after this week- not that it has anything to do with this- I find the provocation slightly, to get personal, provocative. 

 

Having just seen your posts about your health I do wanna say that the comment was absolutely not anything to do with that and I absolutely do wish you the best there. Internet fisty cuffs and sparring matches mean nothing when it comes to health. My full apologies if it came off as insincere.

 

4 hours ago, Sneaky Queeky said:

IIn plain speaking, I'm sick and tired of the constant, uncivilized response to fans's constant negative opinion, towards Take 2, IE Rockstar Games, since at least 2014; and it has been a constant theme among the moderators and admins on this wonderful message board, for some time, to display a lack of coherence and empathy towards the fans, while constantly humping the rainbow instead of showing any semblance of consensus and engagement with some of the die-hard fans who may have an alternative opinion to the run-of=the-mill experience with the current product.

 

To speak plainly my self, this criticism tends to come from people who don't read very well, or just otherwise twist or ignore what I have said.

 

That's a strong thing to say but basically something I've long noticed is that unless I come out and go "f*ck R*" or otherwise add something bluntly negative to my opinion then it's taken as defending or some sort of "hostile positivity". There are different ways to handle change, express concern or otherwise simply express your opinion but far too often on this forum you criticised for not coming out swinging. Multiple times on matters where R*/T2 have f*cked up and have I straight up criticised them for it while at the same time openly discussed what was going on have I been met with posts claiming I'm some sort of shill when, looking at my own words, I can see exactly where I've blatantly agreed with the general community consensus and criticism, I'm just holding a pitchfork. Being told I'm saying X when I've actually said Y is a frustrating thing to say the least, I'm sure anyone can agree w/ that.

 

As I said on this particular matter, R* will be impacted by people leaving but I personally don't think it's something that we should be stressing too much about right now for reasons I've stated. I have explained this every time, and haven't simply come in and gone "all you moaners are wrong, it'll all be fine". Come RDR3 or whatever is next following VI I'm sure we'll all be here discussing the writing and the impact the loss of people have had.

[sanjay3207]

10 hours ago, Sneaky Queeky said:

Do you think if Vince Gilligan and Peter Gould left half way through Breaking Bad's run it would have still been the same show, irregardless of the hundreds of people working on it? Delusional. David Chase and the Sopranos? Even more ignorant. 

I sort of agree, But the thing with rockstar is that the brand wasn't built by a single or two creative executives who bought the brand to where it is. It has been built by a bunch of people over the years. The problem with rockstar is that we don't hear about them until they leave. So, the fanbase or the community reporters take their name say that rockstar is doomed. 

 

During the original GTA era, The game was developed by the housers; leslie; aaron garbut; jamie king; Gary foreman; terry donavan; paul kurowski and james worrall [Co-Writers and designers of GTA GTA 3, GTA VC AND GTA SA]. After SA released, A lot of them left due to burnout or creative differences or due to the hot coffee controversy ; This includes - gary foreman, jamie king, terry donavan, paul kurowski and james worall. After GTA 4, Rockstar bought/hired the present writers that have been working at rockstar i.e, Rupert humphries and michael unsworth. But, now reportedly michael unsworth has left. 

 

If we consider rockstar's history they always managed to change well in the past. Like leslie being replaced by rob nelson and aaron garbut. Paul kurowski and james worral being replaced by michael unsworth and rupert humphries. When EA bought the renderware engine. They successfully managed to shift away from rendeware and used RAGE engine to develop. 

 

Many Rockstar executives/writers/creatives leaving Rockstar will definitely will have an impact on GTA 6. We don't know if it's for better or worse. The creatives departure after GTA SA did have some impact on GTA 4 [Which is a controversial game in the GTA community] considering how much different it is compared to the original GTA's, So it would be unusual to think that creatives leaving the company will have zero impact on their next game.

 

6 hours ago, Sneaky Queeky said:

"Who cares?"

I agree that the many people on the forums are carrying this attitude and shrugging of any negative comment or concern that is being directed at Rockstar/T2 and there is room for healthy conversation to discuss about these departures.

 

6 hours ago, Sneaky Queeky said:

"hostile positivity"

Whenever someone leaves rockstar, the community reporters report it right away. Yet, when roger drew joined rockstar nobody reported anything. zero news about it.

The negative conversation around rockstar amped up after the jason schrier's july article. Before michael's departure, I several times mentioned about him in the past and his influence as co-writer at rockstar games. But, I always hit with the comments saying that dan houser was the writer who wrote everything and other writers aren't important. But, now michael unsworth reportedly left and users on the social media are suddenly concerned about this departure, the same users who downplayed his role before his departure. This isn't about the conversation around who influenced the writing for GTA 4, RDR2, RDR1, MP3, GTA 5. The conversation is completely about  rockstar creative's departure. 

 

A departure like this will be always negatively received by community causing concern and this news was reported right away.

 

In the past on the forums I have mentioned that roger drew joined rockstar. Also other mentioned about his employment as senior creative writer at rockstar london. 

Michael unsworth departure isn't even confirmed, yet, people decided to report on it without any official confirmation. 

 

Whereas roger drew's joining rockstar has been confirmed by both rockstar and roger drew himself in his resume.

 

I wonder why it wasn't reported. A unconfirmed departure which might be perceived negatively was reported right away, whereas when an emmy winning writer joins rockstar as senior creative writer who has 20 years of experience acclaimed writing shows filled with satire wasn't reported by anyone. These reporters probably thought that the news was way to positive for their liking and doesn't fit their confirmation bias.

https://www.casarotto.co.uk/clients/roger-drew

https://www.rockstargames.com/gta-v/thankyou

 

I am not saying roger drew joining rockstar will result in a oscar level of writing or something or roger drew will singlehandedly will carry rockstar's writing moving forward, My point specifically comes from the fact how the community amplifies negative news and ignores any other news. 

 

I mean, My point can be summarized in a nutshell. We have thread arguing about how michael unsworth departure might be the worst for rockstar. But, there isn't a thread where we speculating or discussing about what roger drew with his experience in writing could bring to rockstar's writing. 

 

 

Edited September 1, 2023 by sanjay3207

[Leonida Man]

10 hours ago, Sneaky Queeky said:

Do you think if Vince Gilligan and Peter Gould left half way through Breaking Bad's run it would have still been the same show, irregardless of the hundreds of people working on it? Delusional. David Chase and the Sopranos? Even more ignorant. 

 

Funny you mention those two cases particularly, as are great examples of death of the author:

Vince Gilligan left the writing room after the second season of Better Call Saul: Still an excellent show.

David Chase wrote The Many Saints of Newark: Inedible, nauseating trash.

[Sneaky Queeky]

28 minutes ago, Leonida Man said:

Funny you mention those two cases particularly, as are great examples of death of the author:

Vince Gilligan left the writing room after the second season of Better Call Saul: Still an excellent show.

David Chase wrote The Many Saints of Newark: Inedible, nauseating trash.

Vince wrote an episode in season 3 and season 6, and Gould wrote at least one episode every season and surely had an influence on the show's direction. But I basically agree with you; Many Saints was a bigger disappointment than I could have imagined. Shockingly bad.  

[sanjay3207]

2 minutes ago, Sneaky Queeky said:

Many Saints was a bigger disappointment than I could have imagined. Shockingly bad. 

 

Chase was against the movie initially. He only made the movie because he had to. I don't think he was really interested making the movie. His bread and butter is TV.

[Sneaky Queeky]

13 minutes ago, sanjay3207 said:

 

Chase was against the movie initially. He only made the movie because he had to. I don't think he was really interested making the movie. His bread and butter is TV.

It's slightly ironic he is so good at writing one hour television, but really always just wanted to make movies, and has never managed to make that transition. Not Fade Away for instance could have been a great miniseries, but as a movie it seemed half baked. It did, however, have a great Gandolfini performance, which always got my attention. 

[Jimbatron]

Hmmm… I’d like to share a point of view on the overall merits of the discussion here.

 

There’s no two ways about it, however positive my intentions, this post is vulnerable to be interpreted as me simply having a go at the staff here. So to emphasise the good will in intention, I’d like to start by saying something unambiguously complimentary.

 

I’ve never moderated an internet forum but I suspect at times it feels like a thankless task. Tons of work is put in, whether it’s taking down inappropriate material, dealing with the constant tidal wave of out and out trolls, all so the rest of us can have a sensible discussion about whatever. There’s a danger that just gets taken for granted. Then on the other hand, as soon as you express an opinion yourself, someone is going to disagree, and the criticism comes flying in.

 

To mention two staff since they are active in this thread, I am very conscious @Spider-Vice and @Jason both put in a massive shift every day to stop this place descending into chaos. If I weren’t for you guys and the rest of the team policing the place, every time I tried to ask a question like “how can you get Pearson’s rabbit request to spawn”, half the responses would be pornography gifs and the other half would be trolls saying “westerns are crap, you should play Call of Duty instead”. So if we don’t say it enough, or at all, thank you for the job you do every day.

 

This said I do feel the staff have come across as a bit heavy handed in their responses in this thread - quite likely with the best of intentions, but nevertheless I think it’s worth trying to explain what this is like from the other point of view.

 

We get the constant use of words such as “fear-mongering”, and that is going to sound - even if not intended - like it’s belittling peoples opinions when they feel concerned about recent developments. Yes, there may be some of that out there, but from what I have seen the vast majority of posts in this thread simply to do fall in to that category. Unless you are ultra specific about which comments you’re referring to when an emotive word like that is used, people are going to suspect it’s directed at them if their opinion is vaguely similar to the one you are dismissing.

 

There is a slight sense of a familiar cultural phenomenon going on here that I feel quite strongly about. This thread is already shifting towards where you have to be in one camp or the other full blooded. Unsworth leaving is either dreadful, or nothing to worry about at all. This kind of polarisation is already firmly embedded in shorter form social media such as Twitter, but so far GTA Forums has thankfully avoided. Differences of opinion have been widely tolerated, if not even encouraged. Staff attitudes do play a disproportionate role in maintaining this culture. If where get to the point where the people in charge contribute to polarising a debate however, then the game is up. Not saying we are at the end of the road here, more it’s a path I hope we don’t go down.

 

I can buy that a lot of the staff responses could be for entirely positive reasons. You could for example take the view that people shouldn’t waste their time analysing developments that they can’t control and are likely very long term in their impact, on the grounds that it’s unlikely to be terribly productive.

 

That might be a healthy attitude in many circumstances, but here I’m not sure it’s actually so helpful. We have to wait so long between titles, people are going to want to discuss these developments.

 

There’s also a fair amount of research (or so I’ve been told in work leadership training), that telling people “don’t worry” about their concerns isn’t terribly effective. At best it comes across as dismissive, at worst it comes across as patronising.

 

What people want to do is discuss their concerns and understand they’ve been heard and validated as not ridiculous. That doesn’t mean you have to agree. But a better way to handle this is to say “yes I get the concerns - no one welcomes news that top talent is leaving”, however “these are reasons to be positive and why if this is handled right it will be ok”, and “this is why I buy the positive side a bit more, although we’re all speculating.”

 

It’s also fair to say if there is an impact it won’t be witnessed for a very long time due to the release cycle. But the “why worry now” argument simply doesn’t work here for me. If you are a R* games super-fans (which most of us here fall into that group whether we admit it or not), then we are almost trained to think long term as we know we won’t get a new GTA game every 2-3 years. We will think about the next title, and the title after that, regardless of the gap between them.

I would certainly not suggest that I myself have an overly negative bias. I said the limited scale of the RDR rerelease was disappointing, and I have describe senior staff moving on as concerning (but not automatically terminal). On the other hand, I have been pleasantly surprised by the FiveM acquisition which I think has enormous potential if handled correctly. But if the counter arguments accuse me of being all gloom and doom, I’m naturally going to challenge back, and I’m sure I’m not the only one that feels that way.

 

For me, the most valuable fans R* has are the real life Arthur Morgans of this world. They’re critical, and will voice their opinion about where things are going wrong. But it is not disloyalty, it is because they want Rockstar to succeed. And I believe addressing the concerns of such fans is an ingredient to their success in the last 20 years.

 

And it is in the same spirit that I write this post. Hopefully the fact that I’ve stuck around over a decade suggests I have some level of positive view towards GTA Forums. A disagreement about the handling of matters such as this is not meant to be deliberately destructive, rather a desire to help (however tiny my degree of influence) ensure this place stays in good health.

 

 

Edited September 1, 2023 by Jimbatron