You’re wrong about Grand Theft Auto 6 (& Rockstar Games)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 23 вер 2024
- Head to geolog.ie/CHAR... or scan the QR code on the screen and use code CHARALANAHZARD70 and they will give you an exclusive 70% off of their award-winning skincare trial set. On top of that you can SAVE BIG on the add-ons products of your choice when you add it to your trial. Thank you Geologie for sponsoring this video!
FIND ME:
Patreon: / charalanahzard
Personal Channel: / alanahirl
Twitch: / charalanahzard
Stream VOD channel: / alanahpearcevods
Twitter: / charalanahzard
Instagram: / charalanahzard
Facebook: / charalanahzard
Tip: ko-fi.com/char...
Head to geolog.ie/CHARALANAHZARD70 or scan the QR code on the screen and use code CHARALANAHZARD70 and they will give you an exclusive 70% off of their award-winning skincare trial set. #sponsored
is it me or is your whole video a blur filter?
So, You are NOT leaking GTA6 for us then? 😢
@@RocafellaPlaza😂
She's bloody serious, crappy little game with zero efforts about cry little adult people lol.. for reallll...
I don't think a flying thing about your reviews or numbers, if you want to keep being a child from early 19centry, keep doing that..
Totally reasonable take.
Only thing that drives me nuts is the lack of single player DLC. I get it (the focus on online), but they did it so well. Ballad of Gay Tony and Undead Nightmare were so good.
That combined with Dan Houser leaving after rdr2 has most of my trust in gta6 dead tbh
@@bazookatoothYeah, I'm worried about that a lot too (though I'm not sure if I SHOULD be), since he was behind every banger since GTA III.
@@IsraelWokoh yeah it's probably a bit naive when you think about how big the teams are who make rockstar games, but still. Lead writer on every banger they've made... And then you start thinking about why he would leave.
I'm sure it'll still be a good game, but the hype I usually have for rockstar games just isn't there anymore
Not just Dan Houser. Everybody who made "some of the best games of all time" have been gone for half a decade.
People make games, not dev company brands. It's why every narrative for Call of Duty has sucked since Infinity Ware 1.0 disbanded and reformed as Respawn Entertainment with the same devs. You can't even talk about Infinity Ward today as anything but a marketing product own by the publishers because the people who made Infinity Ward good are now making Titanfall, Apex Legends, and Jedi Fallen Order/Survivor.
EA isn't EA, it's a marketing product that owns an IP churning out games with none of the devs that made EA good.
This happens all the time in the industry. Alanah is defending the success of an IP that none of the devs who made the IP good will ever work on in the near future.
@@MrBazBake obviously, but it's way more significant for somebody who's been in a position to call a certain amount of shots to leave than the people who are essentially just there to do what they're told to do. Talented as they are
Really understandable take. The one thing I'm not a fan of is the lack of Single Player DLC. I still remember playing GTA IV's story dlc and they were incredible! They moved away from any of that and put focus on the online component which I could never get into.
I remember seeing the "opening soon sign" on the casino expectation it to be single player dlc story but it wasn't
People quickly forget that they actually announced story DLC for a late 2014 release but then nothing else happened. Liars? No way!
@@sopcannon😂
@al112v4 Pepperridge Farm remembers.
Could be that they didn't know where to actually go with single-player DLC. With IV, it was easy. The online was nowhere near the scope of V. And sure if you played a lot if IV you prefer that, but also the DLC's would split the community and then you had some people playing this while some played that and then you have the community split between three different versions of the same online, it wasn't all that great really.
Then, if you make the single-player stuff, I know I had my thought of how it could work by telling the prequels of all the characters, but I am not the one to say that would work. And tbf most consoles are connected to the internet I would bet, and Rockstar knows how many people actually played the story to the end vs. Playing online to know which is more worth there time.
And of anything they made the content free to access, do we forget that "The Lost and Damed" and "The Ballad of Gay Tony" cost money? Just like a shark card, except if you played the game enough, you can access the stuff they could have completely locked behind, making you pay real money and then still pay in-game money for? Imagine paying $10 real dollars to unlock the Cayo perico stuff, then still pay a million GTA dollars for the submarine.
A true and honest leak, 100% real; Rockstar will release a trailel for GTA 6 at some point in the future
You probably right
😂😂😂
😂
😂😂
Alright that's enough internet for you honey, lets go to sleep
Speaking of great studios, cashflow and future games. There was a time when I felt the same way about Valve, hoping all that Steam money would help fund a masterpiece of a third installment to any of their gaming franchises.
GTA Online never made them become contempt the way Steam did to Valve, it only made them more ambitious.
Those man child’s at the game awards last year who came to stage about Gt6 smh
@@Alex_Logan22 Valve almost has ambition creep. They've canceled and reset so many games, which is why we don't have a 3 of anything. However, their ambition did lead to Half-Life: Alyx, which I adore. Now, does it rub me the wrong way that they essentially ended on another cliffhanger? Yeah. It's rude as hell. Still, I feel that Rockstar would've dropped a GTA6 right now if Online didn't do so well. Ultimately, t's a double-edge sword where resources went to Online and things dragged until many of the devs that signed up to do singleplayer games have left the company. It must have taken a heavy toll.
Well half life alyx came out a few years ago and its objectively the most well made if not the best vr game
@@BoomSlang001
Game development in general has taken a lot longer, it would've taken this long regardless of GTA Online or if they did single player DLC
I’ve been lurking the GTA 6 subreddit and they are absolutely DOWN BAD for any tiny detail. No shame, its cool to be excited for a game, but its genuinely crazy how the fan base will take the tiniest detail and then stretch it until they’re certain GTA 6 is being announced tomorrow.
Just take a deep breath and wait for something official. No need to stress yourself out.
The worst part is, that's the mistake that some of the Starfield community made, and it's why those people were so disappointed upon release. They hyped the game up way past what it was ever going to be, and then got mad when the reality didn't match their dream.
They’re acting like Junkies that can’t get a rock to smoke 😂
@@AdmiralKarelia Starfield is an awesome game. Only people that disliked it were the ones that didn't pay attention and thought it was something that it wasn't.
Oh boy, wait until you see the Silksong community then.
Really goes to show how bleak & shallow some peoples lives are.
If they all prioritise everything else a simple game.
In my experience, the bigger the hype around something, usually results in a much bigger disappointment in most cases (aka GTA 5 cough cough)
With the release of the definitive editions of various classic GTA games, Rockstar has shown its true colors of greed & a lack of empathy for their fans.
Many big corporations these days have completely lost the plot about what gaming is & really should be about. And now we have micro transactive buggy messes on our hands, which may make the developers lots of many, but slowly turns their fan base against them.
As someone who couldn't care less about graphics & other trivial features & rather holds in depth writing, plot & visible passion put in agame, in a much higher regard, I probably won't even bother with GTA 6, because I have a pretty good feeling how it will turn out.
I rather stick to the un remastered versions of Vice City or San Andreas & go on a nostalgia trip of a time, when game studios poured their lifeblood into their creations.
Gonna have to disagree with you on this one.
No style of game justifies horrible and manipulative business practices. Id rather not get those games if it means a less manipulative set of games.
Saying for games to be that level, it justifies the behaviour and being something you'd happily engage with by take two is a bad take imo.
It brushes over multiple important factors that puts enjoying a game over the negatives it causes not only for the industry but vulnerable people.
@@vikinghammer87 ill just stick with games that dont manipulate their player base into spending money. You enjoy being a corporate sheep
Valid. But them basically giving up on RDO is still insanely disappointing. Oh and the fact that they seem to refuse to add any of the multiplayer content to the singleplayer versions. like not even the guns. crazy
Also time to name your inevitable GTA6 video "Thank you Sharkcards"
RDO was so bad that it devalued the entire game. I got RDR2 for $20 in 2019 so many people were refusing to buy it. The price it is now.
@@jiggerypokery2962people refusing to buy it? It sold 55 million copies!
@@andrewshandle Well in 2019 it was sitting on store shelves over the outrage of the gold system. People got over it.
@@jiggerypokery2962 it had 29M copies sold in 2019. Honestly, this is just silly.
@@andrewshandlewhy was it discounted so much? It cost less than GTA5
They don't need the cash from gta online in order to make gta6.
Gta 5 exists and gta 4 didn't have gta4 online to sponsor it.
They just want to Milk us for every dime we have before they release a trailer.
“Even a broken clock is right once a day”, is how I see these leakers. You throw enough against a wall and some things will stick. I never form an opinion until I have played a game myself. There are plenty of games out there that people didn’t like, that I enjoyed or vice versa.
100%
*Twice A Day...
@@chriskringle5191 That's the normal expression, but considering how absurd some of the claims by these "leakers" are, once a day might be more accurate.
3:10 As someone else who also loves GTA 3 onward and both Red Deads, that is a hot take.
They may be the most successful, but i don't equate that with greatest, and certainly not the highest quality. Great and high, for sure, but they really are too greedy, as shown with GTA Online. I find it very hard to believe most of the money they make with that game doesn't go straight to the pockets of the higher ups, and not to the developement of GTA6 or RedDead3 or Bully2 or whatever they're working on.
Even if what you say is true, and GTA6 will be the most expensive game ever made up to this point, they made that money a few years ago, and I suspect they've just been milking it ever since.
I probably won't be alive by the time GTA6 comes out, so yes, I take it personally that they've decided to shuffle their feet to make as much as possible.
I welcome a Bonnie & Clyde dynamic in a GTA world
My only thing with Rockstar is that I feel they will only be a GTA and Red Dead factory. I miss games like LA Noire. But, it could be that they are choosing not to say anything, because you’re damned if you do, damned if you don’t anyway. Plus, GTAO is how they’re going to fund the next giant thing. Also, even with its flaws, it works and people enjoy it enough to continue paying for Shark Cards.
Don't fall into the "oh but they need all this money otherwise the next game won't happen" lie. These corporate entities are already rich, they don't need help funding the next thing that's planned to keep them rich.
I agree most of what she said is true. But to think most of that 7 billion dollars is going into gta 6 is a little naive. The people working on the game obviously deserved to get paid and the company to make money, but the mass amount of money from their micro transactions and lack of big fixing on their servers kind of show me they care about the cash flow.
Of course. Because most of the money goes to the owners / shareholders of TakeTwo
@@3matthspace3Who in turn have a vested interest as a result in keeping ng the Goose That Lays the Golden Egg alive at the expense of everyone else!
To be fair, 7 billion dollars over 10 years divided be their roughly 2,000 employees puts that at 350k per employee. Obviously they dont all make that much but 7 billion over 10 years goes real quick when you have to pay that many people, maintain the buildings they work in and hardware they use etc.
You should research the word 'business'. It's very enlightening.
You give off the vibe that you don't work in a business/finance setting. And that's okay. Of course not every dollar from GTA V is going directly to GTA 6. That wouldn't be possible because these companies have other things to pay for outside of game development
I was alive to see the best days of Rockstar. They used to launch a GTA game every couple years while also putting out games like Red Dead Redemption and Bully. It has been 10 years since a GTA release and in that time they managed to release one game. They spent the better part of a decade raking in billions while not properly supporting their game or actively developing a sequel. You can patiently wait for forever, but I've got school age children now. I'm not sure what will come first, GTA VI, Elder Scrolls VI, or my funeral.
Yeah I’m sorry but at a certain point it’s not patience anymore it’s corporate apologia . One game in ten years is unacceptable regardless of how ambitious it is.
All due respect, but unacceptable to who?
I totally understand if we'd already paid for or personally invested in the development of GTA6 and they in turn promised a completed game by now, but we haven't...and they didn't 🤷🏽♂️
@@anotherLword I’m glad someone else thinks like this. A decade without a new GTA game does suck, but realistically speaking we were never told or promised anything. 100% of people are aware of GTA 6s existence against Rockstar’s will. Acting entitled towards a game you weren’t supposed to know about is weird
Red dead redemption 2?
Not developing a sequal? They are developing a sequel. Also they don't owe you anything.
I'm just concerned about gta 6 because the hausers left. They wrote everything I've ever loved from rockstar with stuff from bully to rdr1&2 and gta 4&5.
I'm just unsure how gta will feel without their writing
I’m also worried about that, but would bet most of their story work was done before they left.
I hope that's the case man, the fact they left in the first place is also concerning but there could be plenty of valid reasons.
Just the fact a lot of their top guys left is causing me concern. I know these games are made by a huge amount of people but I wonder what changes there will be since people that usually had a bunch of sway left.
@@charalanahzardbut GTA stories since 4 are very topical, so in this case I would think the story work is not the first thing that is being worked on. Or it would be outdated by the time of release.
Don't forget benzies the practical go to guy, lazlow Jones, and another guy i forgot his he left just recently as well as a bunch of other people it's not the same rockstar you once knew!
I totally agree with you. I'm 37 and R* is my favorite developer of all time. I have played every game in their catalog since Gta 1 when I was in 7th grade. RDR 1 was when I decided they are my favorite. However it's been 10 years, and we have gotten 2 games from them. One of those is THE best of all time (RDR2) BUT but I just miss the days when we would get smaller experiences in between the bigger ones. I know it takes forever to make the games as detailed as they do, but it's R* and I just miss how they were in the gen 7 console lifespan.
Almost none of Rockstar’s games are games I’ve personally been interested in playing, but even so I recognize that they are a great studio. I hopped into Red Dead 2 online to play with a friend during the lockdown, and was blown away by how rich and detailed the world was, and how quickly I was immersed in it. Seriously amazing.
if u dont like a game like gta i dont know what on earth u playing mate lol
@@LittlFoxy ha ha - yeah I know, people love the GTA series, I just don’t happen to. We all like what we like. Lucky for us there are games out there for everyone. I like Mass Effect, Horizon Zero Dawn and Horizon Forbidden West, Fallout, Outer Worlds, Starfield… stuff like that.
ey since u like the other good games i forgive u for not liking gta *hits the gavel* you are dismissed@@landonewts
@@landonewts Ah, more of an RPG player rather than an Action Style Shooter. I prefer both, as long as it is done well
As a counterarguement, look at how many good games they made from 2000-2010 vs. 2010-2020. Rockstar was different back then compared to what they are now. They weren't afraid to get sued, go to court, and fight for their products and gaming as a whole. Rockstar today vs the Rockstar back then feels like they're resting on their laurels.
It is the entire industry, my guy. Why do so many people just not get this? 4 year dev time is the bare minimum nowadays and in the vast majority of cases, it far exceeds that in the AAA space. Part of it has been uncontrolled scope creep (dev's fault) and part has been the ceaseless demands for increased fidelity (gamer's fault).
@@LicoriceLainit’s all the pubisher/dev’s fault. They set the expectations
'bUt ThEy TaKe ThEiR tImE tO mAkE a MaStErPiEcE' keep it quiet baby who wasn't even born when Manhunt came out.
Comments like that totally put me off and totally ignore that YOU can perfectly make games with half the budget of GTA V or RDR2, R* used to be great in the 2000s with Tennis Table, Bully, The Warriors or the GTA LC/VC Stories spin off games. What's so hard about making those type of games again? Nothing, just pure greed and laziness cause huge companies these days are more focused on massive big budget projects feeling like movies (I hate how many of them include 'Studios' on their names pretending they're ashamed of making video games) and not actual purely artistic video games.
@@al112v4I was a teen when Manhunt dropped, but please, keep deluding yourself that the industry is just twiddling their thumbs while you piss and moan.
Something changed though. I remember back in the GTA III, Vice City, San Andreas days, I so often just hopped into these game not to play through them, but to have fun, take a bike along the beach in VC with 80s pop blasting in my ears at sunset, fly a plane all around San Andreas or just battle the police for fun. As much as I enjoy GTA V, each time I play it, I complete the main story and the more important optional objectives and activities and that's it. I never felt like playing this game just for the joy of driving somewhere for no reason. So, something has changed, but it is totally possible that what changed is actually me, having grown up and not really being able to play these games as an adult in the same way I was able before. That being said, I have to concur that GTA V is one of the most... complete gaming experiences ever made. Just one that, for some reason doesn't really encourage me to keep playing it after completing the story.
However, I'm a little concerned about the future of Rockstar. I admittedly haven't been keeping up with it nearly enough, but didn't they lose their main writer after GTA V and RDR2? If I'm remember correctly, hopefully this doesn't result in a drop in writing.
And it would only help, for me as a PC player at least, if Rockstar didn't hate PC quite as much. I was okay with waiting for GTA V for few years to get the updated version with the FPP mode. Slightly annoying to wait, but worthwhile. What still angers me, however, is that RDR1 remaster isn't coming out on PC.
Really you didn’t go biking up Mt Chiliad in Gta V just for fun? Or explore using the submarine? Breaking into the military base, steal one of the jets and trying to make it out alive? RDR2 I think added a immersive and relaxing element to their games which hasn’t been there. Being able to ride into the Grizzlies, go hunting, set up a tent, cook your food, make a coffee and take in the scenery is awesome.
It's not even a remaster it's just a port
Yeah Dan Houser not being at Rockstar anymore is huge concern for the story
Nothing changed but you bruh. You grew up. That kid mindset ain't the same.
@@callmetony147 Like I said with my comments, something did change, me in this case perhaps
I dont want the most expensive game ever made, i'll just take a good game, thank you very much.
Yeah BUT... you can't say that the sucess of the microtransaction economy in GTAV has made the games industry better. At least I can't. And Rockstar managed to make GTAV before (and without) the billions that were made from those microtransactions. There's no going back now though. Every teenager in the world has already spent their parents' money. And that is why we never got a single player DLC for V. We will never have 3 DLCs for a GTA title again. I hope the 80s themed T shirts and shark cards were worth it
This is exactly why I don’t fully agree with her take.
Rockstar said something 😮
They sure did. My UA-cam is melting and I heard Twitter crashed.
Completely agree. GTA/RDR Online are basically the Rockstar Patreon, imo. Maybe there's some correlation with age, but as much as I want to see what Rockstar has for us next, I have too many great games and not enough time as it is. Rockstar are some of the best storytellers we've ever seen and they have more than earned some patience.
Footsteps in the snow in rdr 2 were impressive, but those shrinking horse balls when it gets cold….. chefs kiss!!
I'm not the biggest GTA fan, I did love Vice City and San Andreas. But even I have to admit that over a decade is a long time to wait. Two console cycles have ended in the time they've taken on their next project.
I'd be a bit frustrated too if I was invested in their games and then made to wait this long with absolutely zero news on the next title. Just being fair about it.
I've been a huge fan of GTA since the Vice City days and I've honestly never understood the frustration people have with Rockstar whenever they keep their heads down making another game, without announcing to the whole world what they're working on.. like be patient, you already know whatever they're cooking WILL be great and you'll get it when its ready.. besides its not like you don't already have a mountain of other games to play
Invested? Sounds like entitlement.
@@patoolian sure, people are entitled to know if they even care about making games anymore
@@14ElmStreet28 unless you have a stake in the company, you're just spectator, enjoy the show.
You know the world has gone a little goofy when your "hot take" is just, being an even keel person. "Hot take, Rockstar is doing fine and everyone here is acting like children". It's true! I totally agree with Alanah. It's wild that she has to preface that opinion as a "Hot take". Relax everyone, GTA VI is coming.
I believe it’s perfectly fine to hold Rockstar accountable for its leadership’s reported poor treatment of its employees, as you touched upon toward the end. And to wonder if that same treatment is being perpetuated while they’re currently developing whatever is next.
I also believe the money pipeline argument is fine… in a vacuum. However, let’s not forget that GTA Online features/featured a literal casino alongside its micro-transactions. Think too hard about that and one begins to wonder if that virtual casino tapped into the addiction-prone part of a segment of players, and how much those players collectively spent because of that.
I don’t doubt GTA6 will be one of the most expensive games ever developed. But let’s be real, much of that money is being pipelined directly to Take-Two’s shareholders and executive class. And if we receive a highly detailed world with the same clunky controls and realistic character movements so lovingly animated that they waste our damn time (looking at you RDR2) then, for me personally, the wait (and abuse and predatory actions) truly will not have been worth it.
But she wants her goddamn footprints in the snow! Worker exploitation, illegal gambling mechanics and literally the worst and most monetization practice in form of shark cards are all worth it, aren't they...
Good thing you’re only one person with horrible tastes
@@br5073 u mad?
I love how well this has aged. Folks fixing their lips to doubt the prowess of Rockstar Games based on a bunch of leaked alphas from several years ago oughta be ashamed of themselves.
Rockstar has now said something🤣
There's no way a GTA game needed to come out 13 years ago spanning 3 generations of consoles with no single player DLC and that many years of online updates just to have snow footprints. Footprints in a video game today should be a fairly easy thing to accomplish.
I agree with your points, but you're completely acting like it's all good. Because of GTA online, we never got GTA single-player expansion. We never got RD2 story expansion, and RD2 online was half backed and canceled. Also, because of GTA online, we are waiting this long for GTA 6.
The word *'simp'* always applies.. to everything.
Jokes aside, as someone who is also in the industry people talk *a lot* about things they do not understand or know anything about. They see they bark, that is literally it. They don't take time to understand what is going on, ever, no matter the topic.
I agree, I think Rockstar is also #1 possibly 2# at this point with my personal favorite being FromSoftware. (judged by quality not profit)
Ive not been following you for long but i can tell you're super genuine and hope you do well.
She use to work of IGN she's been around for a longtime
She's been in the gaming world for a long long time now. She currently works at Santa Monica Studios (the creators of the God of War games) in California.
Let’s hope that some of that massive budget goes towards revitalizing GTAs gameplay and mission structure.
Fun fact: for every second, we get closer to a GTA 6 announcement trailer than we have ever been before
2025 is the day
that's not totally accurate. If the world ends in 2057 due to nuclear war, there's no guarantees that the trailer would have been ready by then.
@@lewis4929 well we still would closer to getting the trailer regardless of if they would cancel it or not
Proof? what’s your source every second gets us closer to a trailer? 🤔
@@joshuatealeaves common sense? Say the trailer releases next month, that means every second, we get one second closer to getting the trailer...because the trailer releases on a set date and is not constantly moving away from us until the end of time meaning that every second makes us closer to it
All I know is that rdr 2 may be my favourite game of all time. I just love it so much and always go back for more. As for gta vi, I’m sure it will be amazing and I’ll definitely be getting it, but I am slightly worried about it’s quality since they lost a few very important members of the team.
This. You could almost say fundamental members of the team, considering.
GTA 6 trailer early December 2023!! 🥳🎉🍾
Should say GTA 6 Trailer was "officially announced" by Rockstar. Dec 7, 2023, I believe.
"The only way GTA 6 can exist is if GTA 5 is a juggernaut cash cow." I'm not buying it. While it would be incredibly unlikely that Rockstar would put out a bad GTA game but lets say, for the sake of argument, that 5 flopped hard. At that point, GTA is still a massive franchise with immediate brand recognition. Even if 5 made no money, Rockstar would eventually come back with GTA 6 because GTA has proven to be their cash cow in the past. You can argue that the quality of the next game will be better because of the success of the previous one and I would probably agree with you. However to suggest that GTA 6 wouldn't exist without the cashflow of GTA 5 is ludicrous. While there wasn't an official statement, there is no doubt in my mind that regardless of how well GTA 5 did, we knew that GTA 6 would be released eventually even before GTA 5 came out.
I agree with you, and I think you have a unique perspective that most of us won't ever experience which makes your opinion extra informed. People need to realize that the scope of games they have come to expect takes a lot of time, which I don't think they ever will. There are keyboard Kyles everywhere.
The scope of games have been expected by players as game studios have pushed for them, and they have pushed for them because they make money.
A factor that I think needs to be talked about when it comes to the cost of GTA6 nearing its release will be the amount of marketing that'll be done for the game. In the months leading to the release I wont be surprised if we see adds, billboards, trailers, etc pushed EVERYWHERE and that will cost so much!
This IS the marketing.
Idk. They had the shark card money when RDR2 was released and they never really marketed on a big scale, and to be honest that's not really their style. They don't really go to e3 or show off their game in a Livestream they just release the trailer on UA-cam and because it's GTA it'll go trending anyway. They did it with GTA5 and RDR2
Absolutely, the marketing budget alone for this game will be more than some entertainment products *entire* budget.
The marketing for GTA 6 will cost more than The Last Of Us 2 cost to develop plus the marketing no other studio gets this
When the marketing for GTA6 starts you won't be able to see anything else other than GTA6
The people that created and made GTA what it was in the first place are no longer at the company. Perhaps I'm just aging out of gaming in general but I have absolutely no enthusiasm for GTA 6.
You’re not wrong about Rockstar being probably the greatest AAA studio of all time. However, Rockstar (I’m just calling it how it is, they can’t take a piss without Take Two’s approval so what’s the difference) has severely frayed from what it was at the release of GTA 5.
They don’t care about the community. Look at Red Dead Online. GTA+. Cancellation of story mode dlc. Removal of hundreds of not only day one but dlc vehicles. Nerfing any half decent legit money making method. Ignorance of game breaking glitches. The “definitive” version.
I’m little disappointed by this take. Rockstar/Take Two is milking players for every dollar. I’ve watched the decline in quality (and quantity) of updates over and over again for a decade. I rarely play GTA Online anymore, and with the takeover of FiveM, I fear for the future of RP. They’re already nuking real-life vehicles from RP servers. I get it, it’s infringement in a massive scale, but it’s a sign of what’s to come. More monetization. Making RP servers safe for it.
I will agree Rockstar likely the goat. However. fair criticism and annoyance at their blatant greed is not unjustified. It goes too far in many circumstances but it’s too easy to see where it comes from. I won’t call you a shill. I don’t think you are. But you are coming off as an apologist for poor performance on Rockstar’s end. I may sound alarmist but knowing how deep they dove into solely supporting GTA Online in a way that still earns them nearly a billion a year, 10 years after it’s release, it’s fair to be worried the greed will hurt the next installment. My fingers will remain crossed because I want nothing more than for 6 to be the masterpiece we all crave. Cheers.
I strongly disagree with your take on GTA Online is a means to finance GTA 6, in fact it's the opposite. It's been stated on numerous quarter-end calls from Take-two that the amount of money that's earned from GTA Online is the reason why GTA 6 has yet to become a thing. The numerous times that some fake trailer for gta 6 or some other leak about gta 6 is made public, take-two's stock price drops because shareholders think that means the end of their cash cow, GTA online.
GTA Online is a new thing for R*, previously they took the money they earned from the previous game and roll that over into the next game. GTA III was born from the revenue from GTA, GTA 2 and GTA London. The huge success of GTA III then spawned GTA Vice City then GTA San Andreas. Those games were waaaay before things like horse armor, micro-transactions and battle passes.
R* is great with single player experiences, it wasn't until Red Dead Redemption and GTA 4 where they dipped their toe into multiplayer. GTA Online was born from the "monetize everything" and "they're not customers, they're consumers" mentality. It shows that at first R* was trying to make GTA Online a cash grab with peer to peer multiplayer that relied on the closed systems of the consoles. When it finally came out on PC over a year later, that's when R* realized that they actually had to do things like prevent people from destroying the fun for other players and incorporate anti-cheating measures into the game. Not to mention that R* bundled shark card dlc with gta 5 on steam so you couldn't refund the game.
The ONLY reason people could be a bit cautious around GTA VI is the departure of Dan Houser and Leslie Benzies from the franchise. I don't know how much impact studio heads have on a game, but they have been key figures in the GTA franchise since the early days. (and I guess the popularity of GTA Online impacting design choices in GTA VI).
But Take Two is expecting their FY2025 to be very important, so that is a decent hint at GTA VI releasing in that timeframe (which is Q3 2024 - Q2 2025 if im not mistaken)
Dan Houser wrote a bulk of their games so between him leaving and general tendency to not offend people these days, I'm concerned about the writing in VI. That aside, I'm sure Rockstar has enough leverage to not let Take2 f**k it up.
Most down to earth take on the whole thing. Finally someone is keeping a level head
Its why I have always watched and loved Alanahs content, her takes are always well informed and level headed.
@@superhandsminiatures1673 First time I've ever seen her and the first 3 minutes I was checking for an Adam's apple 😅, we don't have smart rational level headed women over here in "the states".
@@spiegeltn damn, that was super sexist. Way to go, alanah. great public you're cultivating with those "female game characeters are ugly" talk points
That was a compliment, and it just flew right over your head, didn't it? You gotta read between the lines. I was actually saying she sounds like a smart woman but in my 40 plus years on this earth I've learned you never truly know someone until you live in the same house with them. Male or female.@@nathansossai
No, dude. You just generalized all women in a whole country as "not being rational or smart." That's the DEFINITION of sexism.@@spiegeltn
I think part of the issue is that Rockstar Games IS the publisher. Of course it's Take-Two making those bad decisions but at the end of the day Rockstar Games is the name that appears on the screen. Most people don't understand that the actual developers (Rockstar North, San Diego, Toronto, etc.) are not the ones actually making the decisions, same thing happens with 2K. And of course this is all very convenient for Take-Two because they just get to hide behind those names. I bet most people who play GTA and RDR don't even know about Take-Two.
There is absolutely no shortage of amazing video games these days. They can wait.
This 💯💯💯
I know some people that don't play anything but gta and fortnite
Good take.
There's barely any ps5 games that are decent.
@@Starsteam1 you must have a really limited taste in video games then😂
The thing with Shark cards is they take advantage of a few people. I dont want to have my favorite game funded by someone spending all their money on in game currency and going broke. I appreciate that the game needs money to make, but I have to believe that this form of fund raising is not necessary. BG3 is a different beast altogether but they did not need microtransactions and in game currency in DOS:2 to make BG3 happen. I know this is due to Take 2 being the publisher of the GTA games whereas Larian has no publisher. But I am still not going to excuse Take 2s predatory business practices just so I can get the GTA game I want. Even kickstarter or early access would be preferable in my opinion to something like Shark cards.
Great points Alanah. I lurk the r/GTA6 subreddit almost daily and it drives me nuts most of them pretend like RDR2 doesn’t even exist. I always see stuff like , “Rockstar doesn’t care anymore” and “Rockstar just milks GTA Online” and “10 years is too long between games”. Completely ignoring the fact that Rockstar literally dropped one of the greatest games of all time just 5 years ago.
And let it's potential die while still milking gta online. And don't forget to mention PC servers being flooded with hackers so it's virtually unplayable! Also someone stole my rockstar account and have no way to get it back, when i asked rockstar for help with 3 different tickets it never got resolved! Rockstar is good at making singleplayer follow the line on the waypoint on the road games. that's it.
@@struggleryoutubeUnfortunately Red Dead Online was dead from the get go because the tone and setting don't allow Rockstar to come up with and sell whatever whacky thing they want like a rocket powered horse or something.
Some also want smaller games from them, not just huge games that take a lot of years to make, they did that before, but i guess now it's take more time to make games in general for everyone
Dropped it and abandon it. Also No real good Leader anymore at Rockstar they all left. I expect nothing from GayTA sex
@@struggleryoutube I don’t think there’s other games that offer the same kind of free roam multiplayer gameplay like Rockstar has in their games so I’d disagree they’re only good at single player. Their Heists coop content was also great.
GTA 5 online is literally funding GTA 6 and people don't seem to realize that.
People are never gonna understand
When the leaks came out last year it was clear what they were trying to do with the game so they can take their time with the game
"Some idiot with a Twitter account" I regularly feel this way every time I get on Twitter cuz it really never fucking fails lol
Thanks for adding your voice and context to this. The more of this we have in the space, the more healthy we all are.
GTA online is not good for the industry nor has been beneficial to Rockstar's other properties not named GTA or Red Dead. GTA Online is the reason why there is no Bully 2, Max Payne and LA Noire 2. Quite frankly its why GTA 6 is still years away from release. Considering the success of GTA Online its safe to say that the online component is bigger priority than single player experience. I would have agreed with you regarding Rockstar being the greatest studio in 2012 but now I'm unsure. Rockstar is the most successful and recognizable developer in the world. Even non-gamers know about GTA. The problem is many studios had catch up with Rockstar's level of quality and detail producing better games without the endless funding that Take-Two provides.
100% with you on this. I'm more than willing to wait because I know that Rockstar will always deliver.
I don't mind waiting since we have so much to play in the meantime anyway, but I do think there's legit criticism for Rockstar in how they never deliver any single player DLC anymore.
- GTAV was primed at the story conclusion for new adventures with the trio and I was so looking forward to it, but we got nothing at all.
- RDR2 was such a beautiful world and even if we can't explore more with Arthur, there were so many secondary characters they could have explored or just doing more with the world they made, but without the (toxic AF) online mode involved.
And given the prestige of these games, the DLCs being priced at $40 or so would have been justified and people would eat it up. I just feel they could do a little more for single player before moving to online-content only and whatever their next game is.
Waiting for 13 years lol
@@blade5883 It will be worth it. Waited 5 years from GTA 5 to RDR2 and that wait alone was worth it. Already been 5 years since RDR2 so I expect GTA 6 to be even more stunningly detailed.
Always delivers at launch and then does some heinous shit after the game has been through the review cycle
@@bobbobson9952 heinous shit after launch? Like what? Also remember we’re talking about the developers right now, not the publisher, Take 2.
GTA Online revenue maybe $8B+, but that's not the cost of development, which was reportedly $170 million. GTA 5 was developed without the backing of a GTA4 Online / SharkCard system, so I don't see that the online component as a dependency of success AAA development for Rockstar - I think its just so insanely profitable, that they don't want to cannibalize their own IP by releasing GTA6 'too early'. As soon as 6 releases, the player base will migrate across.
Every major studio used to be "the greatest" at one point or another. The issue with Rockstar now is it is quickly becoming like every other once great, just as Blizzard used to be or Bethesda. Both Skyrim and GTA V are competing for rereleases at this point and just selling old content at AAA prices which isn't something anyone should defend. That is the issue, companies taking live service or rereleases to the extreme and essentially exploiting players...mind you these players are morons who keep falling for the same thing, so there's plenty of blame to go around. No one is discounting what Rockstar accomplished in the past, ppl are concerned about what they are becoming and it's not looking great.
People were talking just like you before RDR2 was released though and that’s their best and most complete package of a game they’ve made to date objectively. There’s way too much negative focus on their live services which for me personally is unwarranted cause they’ve put out some really good content there which you can play all for free and not even spend too much time grinding to access it. They’re a big company where over 2000 people will be working on their next main line game while a small team while keep those live services up to date at the same time, a lot still haven’t grasped that it seems.
@@jgunner94Yet now Redemption 2 online is a boring paywall.
@@KevinKeys-KK I’m sure that 8 billion mark is just from copies sold cause it’s sold over 185m so it’s definitely gotta be more than that figure including the 10 years of Gta Online. I’m one that defends Rockstar on the method they do their live services cause they’ve released some big updates that have really good coop content in them for free, the microtransactions fund that area of the game so people having a problem with those has felt wrong for me. The Heists content in particular, I don’t think that’s actually been rivalled by anyone else.
@@gamer-px5cu I played some good content in there without paying anything more than the original game cost. It’s not spoke about enough how their updates are released for free imo.
@@jgunner94 Making free update doesn't excuse microtransactions and greedy methods.
In Redemption 2 online you have to pay to unlock actual mission content or you have to grind days just to collect enough gold to unlock it.
Nobody here is criticizing Rockstar value and quality.
The scope of RDR2 is insane.
1. Footsteps are visible in the snow.
2. Every voice line has three separately recorded versions depending on distance to the character.
3. The horse's scrotum changes size depending on the temperature. THE HORSE'S SCROTUM. CHANGES SIZE. DEPENDING ON THE TEMPERATURE.
The third item is a lot easier to accomplish compared to the other two items on the list (just scale a part of the model depending on a number), but just the sheer fact that someone spent time on this detail is ridiculous. Of course, there's a possibility that it's just something a developer and/or an animator have done sneakily without proper approval/design/etc - I don't know how strict code review is in Rockstar dev departments.
I don’t disagree with your overall point, but we did get gta5 before they were making stupid crazy money from micro transactions. So the whole, “we only get these games because the money they make on shark cards” doesn’t completely add up.
They Were able to fund RDR2 with that Money CD Project wanted to make an Online game so they could support Their Single player games. Pawel Sasko Said one reasons Cyberpunk came out early is they could not Afford to keep it i devlopment.
She works for a game company, so I guess she’s trying to justify that terrible manipulation of game players.
Just because people voice unfounded criticism of rockstar or are impatient doesn’t mean that GTA six is going to be good. Rockstar could spend hundreds of millions of dollars making GTA six and that wouldn’t guarantee it’s going to be good. Nobody knows, until they play it. People are concerned that the focus has turned to the online component as a revenue stream and that the single player experience may suffer because of that. It’s an absolute fallacy to say that the more money than online component makes, the better GTA six single player will be. No one knows what portion of the revenue they are spending on GTA six and how well they are spending it. The company having money at its disposal does not in anyway guarantee the quality of the products they will produce in future
Completely agree.
I'm more than happy to wait, because I know that they want to put their best out there. It will be polished, it will look good. It costs money to get there and make it happen. I get the hype, but it's just a never ending cycle of people thinking a trailer is going to drop, then they get angry at Rockstar because people can lie on the internet. People just need to calm down a bit, and just be patient.
Good things take time.
This is giving "the banks are to big to fail" type vibes, but i see your point
A little correction to one note. Rockstar games is the publish for Rockstar studio games. The trilogy remaster was published by Rockstar games.
With that said yes, Rockstar games was formed under take two interactive which is owned by 2k games publishings. Rockstar games are like a Sony or Microsoft with having multiple studios with similar names based on location that make make specific games from their series.
GTA online was part of GTA5, which is the latest GTA release. From that, it should be clear that to make a game of the size and quality of GTA5 revenue from online isn’t needed.
It’s clear that they’ve allocated their resources to making online content because that’s the most profitable, but I seriously doubt they cross subsidising.
It is the lack of transparency that bugs people I think. The silence from Rockstar after saying they would provide an update “soon”, only to then not provide even a word for over a year is sure to make fans of the series go a little crazy! In the end, the hype for a game is insane and regardless of the strain this episode has had on the community, everyone is still gonna buy the game
No, they said they'd share more "as soon as they're ready". You took the "soon" out of context completely.
Their games take a generation to make now. So-called fans should know this the most intimately, and be accordingly patient.
That, and there have been a million and one quality games released in the ten years since GTAV dropped.
Like, branch out FFS.
@@IsraelWokoh As I said, transparency is the key word here. It’s all good shitting on Rockstar’s passionate fans, but I feel like a bit of communication with the community wouldn’t have hurt. One must suspect that there has been a setback of sorts…
@@IsraelWokoh I did and don't really give a shit about Rockstar anymore. 10 year wait is a joke "Their Games take a generation to make now" Is full bs and you know it. You know take two was just milking GTA 5 online for years. Cause it made a shit ton of money with a lot lower cost than making another game. That's why no other GTA game in a decade. Not cause it take a generation to make it. No way a gta game takes more time than a MMO to make.
People will buy it anyway, so why rush?
@@bdbd1390 I know better than to engage with you, but hey, I got a little time.
"'Their games take a generation to make now' is full BS and you know it."
Are you... choosing to be blind to reality? Games are constantly becoming larger, more time-consuming and more expensive to make by the year. Did you even know it took five years to make GTAV?
"Take-Two was just milking GTA 5... That's why no other GTA game in a decade."
Except they released a little game called RED DEAD REDEMPTION II in that time. You may have heard of it. It took EIGHT YEARS.
"No way a GTA game takes more time than an MMO to make."
Uhh... yes, it most certainly can?
I don't think people are truly mad with Rockstar, they're mad about life in general, the upcoming great depression 2.0, and the collapse of the us empire as a world power. Rockstar just makes for a convenient punching bag.
Couldn't agree more. I only hope that Rockstar won't keep increasing the scale of their games too much (their open worlds are big enough imo) since that might increase the wait between games even more. That being said: I just love that they take their time to polish their games and usually only drop trailers not too far from official release. Makes the wait from then on more enjoyable.
What does that even you don’t even understand business if they have a game currently that’s still making a ton of money why would they release their next project and then slowly kill off their cash cow? they can’t show GTA 6 because in business terms it’s stupid.
@dazzaMusic They are working on GTA 6 though. They announced that they are working on it and we have seen a ton of leaked development footage.
The only they have not released a trailer yet is because it's not ready
Usually Rockstar Games release trailers 2 years before release
@@zaidabraham7310 but they’re holding back because GTA Online still makes a ton of money once they let go of it they will release a trailer
the only thing that could speed up the launch of GTA VI is simply not making any content about GTA Franchise and take your time to not play GTA V and the online version as well. Once the player number falls, then Rockstar will "feel something has gone wrong" and push hem to release the GTA VI sooner. I hope this trick will help.
Thank you. I have been saying this for a while, but people always ignore this reality.
It ain’t my place to suck a corporation off, and all the criticism they’ve garnered is well earned lol. Whether or not take 2 or rockstar are making the decisions, they’ve consistently shown anti-consumer behavior. GTA online has been consistently worked and reworked to make it more difficult to earn money in game, which could actually be seen as a fun gameplay loop, in favor of selling Shark cards. They put their name on the GTA trilogy. And they’re rereleasing a 15 year old game at nearly full price. Just because they’re too big to fail doesn’t mean they deserve to be free of criticism. You can’t justify ruining the fun of a game to fund another game, which will again be ruined by greedy monetization just the same. Nah, this ain’t it 😂
Well said! I am rather disappointed in how RDR2 was handled post launch, however Rockstar creates some of the best games on this planet.
I mean that’s in comparison to GTA V. It still got a pretty good amount of post launch content put into it especially when we look at other games.
I never understood the Rockstar hate. I've always shared the same opinion as you. They're top of the line. AAA as they get. FromSoftware, Insomniac and Nintendo are the only game studios I would put next to them.
Gta V has to be the most polished reliable game I've ever played .
You must be joking right? Have you played GTA Online on PC?
@emeraldos336 no. I was referring to the single player main campaign.
Just want to point out that Rockstar publishes it's own games. Take Two Interactive is just the Parent organization.
I agree that R* always deliver a well made, highly polished, detailed and beautiful game. But honestly I think gameplay wise they're pretty weak these days, the game design feels so outdated. By the end of a modern R* game I feel like doing the missions is just a chore to see how the story shakes out, and unfortunately by then the story also feels fairly long in the tooth. If the next R* game has missions that ask you to go to the starting location, then immediately follow another character to where the mission actually starts, I honestly think someone needs to see if the team is okay because that shit just isn't fun.
It feels like every time there's an unpopular decision made with a major game that's in development a certain proportion of consumers will automatically blame the developers without even considering there's a publisher behind them influencing those decisions.
But channels like yours and no clip are doing a great job of trying to educate people on how games are made and while errors in judgement do happen that the vast majority of devs are just as keen to make a quality product as the audience is to play it. Keep up the quality content Alanah.
08:38 I don't think RDR2 is a good video game, no. Incredible technical showcase, sure, but the convoluted and sluggish controls, poor gunplay and extremely dated mission design made it an absolute chore to play through. Hopefully it isn't indicative of how GTA VI will turn out.
(I agree with the overall sentiment of the video, though!)
I will die on the hill that Red Dead Redemption 2 is the greatest game ever made. Which is the last game Rockstar put out. Even if they never release another game Rockstar are the GOAT
Can very much relate to this sentiment. I feel similarly when people complain about monetized cosmetics in games and how greedy it is compared to games in the past, and although that may be true in certain instances, I strongly believe monetized cosmetics are better than monetized maps and gameplay content like it used to be in many online games. I feel like I'm going crazy when people say they miss mappacks, when back then people used to argue FOR monetized optional cosmetics that don't affect gameplay INSTEAD of paywalling maps and gameplay content. This is similar to GTA online's monetization, where the new gameplay content is free, and you only buy stuff if you want shortcuts or optional things on the side. At the end of the day they need to monetize something or else we won't get anything new! It's a buisiness, and many forget that somehow.
I've said this for years that I have no problem with monetized cosmetics (within $ reason). I've bought one in my gaming lifetime & loved it. So what, I bought a Standard version of the game & played it for months, what's another $5 for a cheap cosmetic? There are a few that go overboard that actually affect the game - they create the game to *need* pay items etc. That's when I side with players.
Microtransactions always affects the game design.
I'm not really sure how can anyone can accept monetized cosmetics, especially when a skin can cost $15, a quarter of the price of a full game. A full game can cost hundreds of millions of dollars to make, and they sell them for $60-$70. Are they trying to say it costs 50 million to create a skin and they have to sell it for $15? It's unjustified no matter how you look at it. They could sell these skins for 25 cents and still make millions off them.
@@gamer-px5cu sure, but only the design of the systems related to the items being sold. If the items being sold do not affect gameplay, they don't affect gameplay systems.
I can live with cosmetics I always hated the map packs from the old cods basically an extra $30 or so for a few new maps and guns could never afford it as a teenager lol
I will never understand people's need to defend billion dollar corporations because some random people on the internet were mean to them.
I agree the clamor for GTA6 is exhausting and frustrations it isn't out yet are ridiculous.
However, I don't think my personal frustration with R is just that their games are high quality or take a long time. I think I miss when their games had rough edges and were allowed to be small. When RDR2 came out, yes, it was one of the most technically impressive games of all time. However, I remember a lot of discourse around there being too many mechanics, too much detail, and some definite bloat. The sim was superceding the game. I don't think footprints in the snow or horse physics were ever needed. It's neat there's a couple hundred animals with unique behaviors and blink and you'll miss 'em interactions with townsfolk, but the games don't need them.
R will probably never make a small game like Bully again because it's not a juggernaut. That's what I don't like.
I get the shark cards are funding the next game of the decade, I really do, and I understand GTA6 has to be that big due to precedence. I just miss when R could make smaller games and didn't feel the need to keep one upping themselves.
I would rather R not make every release the most hyper realistic, detail oriented, mechanic heavy technical marvel and just focus on telling good stories in fun game worlds.
It's like an author who writes poems, short stories, and novels having a bestseller and then suddenly they don't put out anything but best sellers. I really liked the short stories and I miss the poems. Now it just seems like and feels like they're constantly raising the bar and anything that isn't that next masterpiece isn't worth the time.
It's slightly unrelated, perhaps, but I do think R* are wildly overrated. I got sick of their design and general schtick at GTAIV, and I still have no desire to go near GTAV or Red Dead 2.
NakeyJakey has a good video that goes into their problems as game designers.
I sat through an LP of Red Dead 2, and as well as all the gameplay issues, I just don't believe it justified its existence. It took a long time to say absolutely nothing of value, thematically (at least nothing the first game hadn't already said).
So in this sense we're almost on the same page; I don't give a toss how technically, obsessively adept their tech is - I just see thoroughly mediocre gameplay design and a lack of any thematic ambition.
I think Alanah is a bit--- industry-pilled, let's say... She admires the tech and the scale and is inspired by the hard work of lots of skilled people. I don't really give a shit about any of that if I'm just seeing inane gameplay design and repetitive/unambitious writing.
@@SabiJD"She admires the tech and the scale and is inspired by the hard work of lots of skilled people. I don't really give a shit about any of that"
Just because you don't give shit about that stuff, doesn't mean that others don't. Your comment is , "I don't like this stuff, So, I don't that should justifies it's existence." I have been critical of their game design. But, I absoultely love RDR 2 and what it stands for. RDR 2 is still being compared to other games that are being released today.
A game doesn't have to justify it's existence if drops ball on one thing while being the best of the industry in others. It comes down to preference, I can be critical of the design and still see why it's one of the best games in the industry.
@@Sanjay-fg8qh You left out *why* I couldn't give a shit about those elements in that quote, though. The issues with core game design and thematics aren't just arbitrary (I'm not saying, for example, that because I don't really like stories focused on criminality they're overrated).
Though I suppose I have to concede thematics are ultimately subjective. Though I'd *then* argue that the perception of depth or real intelligence in something like Red Dead 2 is symptomatic of very low critical standards amongst gamers and gaming press. At least in the mainstream/mass-market space (that's always been the case).
So no, I would never buy this idea that they make some of the "best" games in the industry. That's a borderline depressing sentiment given what that's essentially communicating. Some of the most lavishly detailed and realised worlds? Sure, and that has value by itself, as spectacle. Back in GTA3 I pined for a first-person mode. I'd love to explore GTAV and Red Dead 2's worlds in first-person. But their gameplay design is just woeful - they barely seem interested in ever expanding on their formula (played one or two R* games, you've played 'em all) - and their writing is so contrived, with no real ambition to say anything. Red Dead 2 span its wheels pretty much from start to finish, adding nothing to what the previous game explored.
Even if they can't be arsed to improve their core gameplay, why can't they really shake things up as narrative? What about a story from the law's side for once? What about a female lead? *Something* different (and yeah, I gather GTAVI might have the latter, but it'll likely still just be another GTA - nigh on identical to GTA3 in how it plays).
Every now and then during the Red Dead 2 LP I'd see moments that'd make me check to see if the game was discounted on the digital store next time I fired up the console. Sometimes it'd be on offer, and I'd almost pull the trigger. But then I'd see another repetitive, reductive story sequence or another reminder of its braindead combat, and be reminded why Red Dead 1 was the last R* game I bought. They have not improved in any meaningful way.
If people praised R* for making really dumb, unambitious games that had amazing worlds? I'd have no issue. But 'industry best' and Great Art™? No way.
@@SabiJD "You left out why I couldn't give a shit about those elements in that quote, though. The issues with core game design and thematics aren't just arbitrary"
I literally said that I dislike their design. I agree there, That's the reason I left it out.
But just because it has a archaic design, does not mean that it shouldn't exist, there is a reason it exists and acclaimed by many.
" (I'm not saying, for example, that because I don't really like stories focused on criminality they're overrated)."
"and their writing is so contrived, with no real ambition to say anything. "
This is just not true and it seems like you are just doing a surface level analysis of their games and coming to that conclusion. I get that you don't like stories about criminality. But that's rockstar's thing. Their games are all about the americana and it's violence. GTA parodies America whereas RDR 2 looks at America thorough a modern lenses and critics America. The van der linde gang, Arthur morgan are just tools just rockstar uses to criticize America. It's always been their thing. No, they aren't overrated just because it deals with criminality. Maybe they are rated on how good they are - Nobody expected rockstar todeliver a story like RDR 2 after something like GTA 5, which is being criticized to this day.
"Though I suppose I have to concede thematics are ultimately subjective. Though I'd then argue that the perception of depth or real intelligence in something like Red Dead 2 is symptomatic of very low critical standards amongst gamers and gaming press. At least in the mainstream/mass-market space (that's always been the case).
"
I don't know if you are being pretentious or joking here. So, just because people have different tastes compared to yours, you come to the conclusion that they have low standards. Your comment sounds like - Just because you didn't like the story, it doesn't justifies it's existence and secondly, if people like this story they have low standards.
Like it or not - Some aspects in their games are best in the industry. Sure, their game design is not being expanded upon which has been a critic of mine and something we agree upon, But their storytelling is excellent. I don't get your criticism of RDR 2's narrative. Both the narrative of RDR 1 and RDR 2 compliment each other. The reason rockstar didn't explore the laws side's of things because, The redemption games has been about van der linde gang, not Pinkerton detective agency. Rockstar and Team bondi literally made a game where you play as the law, maybe you should check that game.
Your criticism and your complaints about the game really comes down to combat design and aspects not tailored to you and that's the reason you don't agree when people say it's art. But that's the thing about art though, Games are still being debated whether they are art or not. RDR 2 excels at a lot of things and always in the conversation about it being art. You disagreeing with it being art will not negate the fact that others do consider it art.
@@Sanjay-fg8qh I agree that what you're calling archaic design, and I'm calling deeply unambitious design, still has a 'right' to knock around. Generic, formulaic things can still be a lot of fun if done well. It's just not enough for me to enjoy given I don't really like their storytelling or, often, writing. I just don't think they get enough stick for what they do (or rather don't do, e.g. evolve, complexify to a degree, etc).
When I mentioned having a story from the law's side that isn't a specific criticism of Red Dead 2. It's just a general example of something new, something different - concepts that seem anathemas to R*.
And no, I was being perfectly serious describing the mass-market as having rather low critical standards. That shouldn't even begin to be a surprising statement, and it's got nothing to do with personal taste. Ditto for the mainstream gaming press. It goes for all mediums - it's just how culture is. Mass-market stuff can be great, sure, but it is what it is.
Ask a general gamer their thoughts on a given thing, and you're not going to get video essay tier knowledge and insight. Those attitudes are reflected in the mass-market products we engage with. I love Starfield, but man, BGS are still braindead writers by and large...
We'll agree to disagree on Red Dead 2's writing and themes. A lot could be said about the previous Red Dead. Anything said about the sequel would, I feel, mostly just go over the same ground.
I also have major issues with how the story is handled; it's frustratingly incredulous seeing just how dumb Arthur and everyone is in that group with regards to Dutch. It has one big note to play, and just keeps repeating it. I wanted it to be over a long, long time before it finally ground to a halt. Had I been playing the thing myself I'm not sure I would've stuck with it.
There's a lot of good quality stuff in the game, performances very much included. I just don't think it amounts to much by the end.
Where did I say it wasn't 'art'? It certainly is that, because pretty much anything can be deemed art. People routinely forget that art is a neutral label - it is falsely conflated with quality. Art can be great, or rubbish, and everything in between. I'd never try to call Red Dead 2 bad art. I'd say it's a mixed bag; some excellent, some poor, lots of it just okay. What I argue against is that it's a great example of *game* art.
Regardless, I appreciate the civil, ahem, discourse. It's perfectly fine to disagree fundamentally.
Its interesting to hear your take on this. I thought you once said that RDR2 was overrated in your opinion and that BOTW was the better game at the time? I might be misremembering this? I still think RDR2 doesn't get talked about enough and I hope eventually it will go down as one of the classic single player experiences that players will keep returning too.
When you combine the story, the detail, the acting, the musical score, the sound design, the environments, richness of the open world, the animations, the scale and the polish, it is absolutely unrivalled. The only downside is that these awesome experiences can ruin some games in the process as Rockstar usually set a new baseline for your expectations.
I tried playing the Witcher 3 after RDR2 and whilst I know it's a great game, I just couldn't get into it. It just felt so empty and dated compared to the expectations I had now gained from playing RDR2.
Just want to say I'm very happy you feel this way never seen your vids before but I subbed because your the only one not complaining and gave the facts thank you 🎉❤
We need to talk about how Armored Core 6 deserves GotY but likely won’t get it
It seems a bit disingenuous to conflate a big budget with quality. Rockstar could make all of the money in the world and use it to develop tech to have the player watch raindrops dry in real time, but how seriously can a person take a game that is a staunch criticism of american capitalism and consumerism if the company producing it is one of its biggest proponents?
Because the writing team and the devs have nothing to do or no control over the financial decisions? And Rockstar is no proponent of capitalism my guy, that would be Take 2, their parent company. Also, lighten up a bit dude, geez 😂
For clarity, although the remakes were made by an outsourcing studio, there were 2 people inside Rockstar who were tasked with overseeing the progress and quality. They were both fired.
You are 100% spot on. No studio even comes close to what Rockstar can do. I do think one of the biggest reasons people dislike GTA Online (whether they'll admit it or not), is that they are concerned that Rockstar will eventually just phase out single player games, and switch to entirely Online development because they just make so much money that way. That would be a truly sad day for gaming, and sometimes it feels like the direction the industry is heading.
I would say this year should relieve at least some of that concern. Just a nonstop flood of banger single player games.
Many studios surpass Rocksteady, tf are u on about
You make a lot of good points. They do put out bangers and the monetisation of them no doubt helps to get stuff made, but they are have significantly reduced their pace of output compared to previous days. GTA V was released 10 years ago, and there's been ONE new game since then that wasn't a remaster. But even that, sure, you can fold that into quality taking time.
What really annoys some people though is the lack of communication from them to people who have issues with this and other things. Things like how the GTA V single player got confirmed by one of the Housers within a year of the game's release, and not only has that not came to be, but they never formally addressed it. Agent was announced with a lot of fanfare, then years and years of nothing and a quiet cancellation. Online's focus is also an issue if you aren't interested in it (I've tried online, but the grind and other players made it interminable), but have to see it constantly getting updated with new weapons and vehicles etc. , while Single Player only gets stuff whenever they release a new generation's version.
I agree with you Alanah! All GTA titles are great! I have been watching your channel for a long time! You are awesome!
3:20 i disagree, i think that EASILY goes to Valve, and not just for the games, but also all their other work, like steam, the index, steam deck, and especially proton, which has largely MADE linux gaming what it is today
Love this! It's like Alanah is speaking for me! Lol agree with everything she is saying
Can't disagree harder that Rockstar is the best of AAA. They have always been bottom of the barrel for me.
I get your points, but i think the criticism of the lack of support of Red Dead Online is perfectly valid.
completely respect Allanah's opinion on this and her industry knowledge FAAR outweighs mine, I think Rockstar does get some fault/blame. At the very least Red Dead Online compared to GTA Online.
I think people crap on rockstar for different reasons. Some of which is completely invalid. Some of which is really about take 2, but some of which really is rockstar.
That's almost word-by-word something I told to a person about superhero movies, the studios shoudn't give a release date, they only have to say that "we are making it" or "we are working on it right now" because a delay can happen, if Rockstar said "Hey Gta6 is going to be released on 2023!" then a few weeks later they say "Sorry Gta6 will only come out in 2025" people would get more angry;
-~-
But let's take a look in the past, when Gta4 came out, it was great, later they did Red Dead Redemption, and technically speacking, this game was like a playground to Rockstar, to try new effects and other mechanics, that later were included in some parts of Gta5(even horses are hidden in game files) and then, they did Red Dead Redemption 2, which was groundbreaking, now think about, if RDR1 was such an evolution over Gta4 and gave us an amazing Gta5, how many time they will need to include the best and biggest features from RDR2 that people love in the giant world of Gta6, or in other words what RDR2 will give to Gta6?
God I love your takes because they’re exactly how I think! The main problem is people are impatient and can’t see the bigger picture. We are at a time now in the games industry where if you want AAA (AAAA, lol) titles you’re GOING TO HAVE TO BE PATIENT! These projects are beyond massive in scope and take many years to develop! God forbid a game release too soon, full of bugs, and then everyone is shitting on them bitching about how crappy the game is.
I find your takes so incredibly refreshing
If you need the highest grossing game of all time in order to even attempt to make your next game, you’ve got more problems as a company than you can shake a stick at lol this is such intense cope
The audio was weird in this video, not sure whats wrong. Clipping, clicks and chirps with robotic sounds.
Personally try not to get mad at anything on the internet. I understand your points and I agree but I also don’t fault people for being frustrated either… 10 years is a long time. Yes I want them to only drop things when they are ready but I don’t think anyone (probably including Rockstar) expected it to take THIS long. Over a decade is wild.
their last game is from 2018 (RDR2), so its been 5 years since their last game which is not a strangely long dev cycle for a game of this scale
@@PixelTrooper 🍪