COO Karl Slatoff says it "doesn't make sense" to release new entry in open-world action series biennially.
Take-Two Interactive has explained why it does not release a new Grand Theft Auto game every two years. Speaking during the Wedbush Transformational Technologies Conference this week, chief operating officer Karl Slatoff explained doing so would degrade the franchise's value.
"Often times people ask us 'Why don't you come out with Grand Theft Auto every two years?' To us, that doesn't make sense, because Grand Theft Auto, every single time it comes out, is a brand new experience. You can't possibly do that in two years. And if we did that, our product would fatigue and the franchise would degrade from a value perspective."
Slatoff's comments match up with Rockstar North developer Leslie Benzies, who said in November that the company could develop a new GTA title every year, but won't.
"We could easily have churned out a new version year after year without really progressing as a franchise, but if we did that, eventually the fans would lose interest," he said at the time.
Grand Theft Auto V is due out on September 17 across the world. Slatoff reiterated that this game will feature a world larger than Grand Theft Auto IV, Red Dead Redemption, and Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas combined.
For more on GTAV, check out GameSpot's previous coverage.
call of duty every year .......people complain (bah! same graphic same crap) AND YET people still BUY.....this is so call :)
TAKE 2 and Rockstar are the saving grace to the gaming industry right now.
Only if EA, Activision, Ubisoft and Capcom would follow suit
Finally a developer who gets it. If Ubisoft had done this with Assassin's Creed instead of milking the crap out of it after AC2 then I wouldn't have sworn off the franchise after AC3.
I whole heartedly agree, and I think Take Two is one of the few decent publishers out there.
They recognize the market value GTA holds and know better than to classify it amongst the unsavoury rabble of games like CoD, BF, and AC, which, although they are great games in their own ways, simply don't have that strong flair a GTA game has, they merely mimic it as best as they can.
Think about, almsot every mainline GTA game released since GTA3 has set a new standard for other games to follow, not necessarily even just in the Open World games genre.
GTA is just one of those franchises that tower above, it's the Mario of the 2000's.
Well I can understand how releasing every two years can cause the game to degrade. I'm still playing GTA IV two years after I purchased it. V looks great.
look at guitar hero.
If they polished up Liberty & Vice City stories for XBLA, PSN & Steam that would be welcome as a way to fill in the gaps between the new games.
This game looks amazing, lets hope it wont be butchered like most other series.
It's just a better product and demands more time. And if gamers didn't act like drug addicts when they buy certain products, like every first person shooter of recent years, the losses would force innovation in other areas as well. Perhaps NOT buying a $15 map pack that one year would have saved everyone some money, or NOT buying a season DLC pass worth $20 that gives you maybe half its worth by season's end.
Are you reading this EA? Maybe that's why Dead Space, Crysis, Dragon Age and Mass Effect are all suffering.
I know this post is old , but , I seen the word "degrade" ? and was wondering , what is the future ? I call the future NOW ! nobody in the world is going to change their minds knowing what is and what could or should be ! everyone I know looks forward to R* games being GTA or whatever ? and I don't know everyone else , but , I venture to say they do too !
U know this is going to be delayed til holiday when the new consoles come out. Don't know why they do this stuff.
(@ mainly Sip & Zevv who are prob the same person on diff accs) San Andreas is a work of art, one of teh most epic games ever made. Huge world and tons to do in it. Tired of traveling slow? Grab a nitrous sports car, a helicopter, or even a jet. When you get where you going you can skydive into your location. Once there grab a racing motorcycle/hijack a decent car/etc/etc/etc. Limitless possibilities... GTA: SA IS one of the best games still. GTA IV was also a great game, had my complaints, but still great. I dont mean good, i mean great. SipahSalar & Zevvion you two are obviously very old, and not at all creative. You guys should shut your filthy mouths. :}
This guy is obviously oblivious to the fact that every game they have released after Vice City HAS actually degraded the franchise. So I don't get what are they being so cautious about.
I don't want a LARGER world, I want a richer world. Row after row of shops, signs etc you can't really do anything with is BORing. Stifling controls are boring. Awkwardly trying to move from GTA theatrics to "realistic" characters, for now, results in boring.
I don't necessarily want 100 hours of meandering...a few dozen hours and even "just" 20 square kilometres chock-full of activity would be a LOT more interesting...
As much as I dislike the GTA series after Vice City, I do respect Take Two for giving freedom of creativity to most of the guys they publish for.
It's kind of weird, but maybe they are my favorite publisher even though most of their games don't appeal to me?
Every company should take as much time as needed to release a quality game not "a game". So if 5 or 10 years are needed for an epic gta, then 5 or 10 years it is.
Also ,BUY the game to support developers.
sorry for my bad english
Quantity -> Quality is the state of the industry right now. Unless it's released by EA then it's shit regardless.
hmm do we have to play five different characters?? why? that is an awful idea, it makes the relationship games of Gta 4 look like a good idea!!
News Flash Rockstar we play games because we like the suspension of disbelief and actually become our characters ( unlike in movies where we see ourselves as third parties,), playing five different people is going to spoil all that, and make the game feel like some soap opera. I knew the series was running out of steam when they gave us GTA 4, it was no way near the product San Andreas was and had even lost all the charm of Vice city.
@amar1234 Grand Theft Auto IV was a leap forward for the franchise. It settled itself into a more realistic presentation, and eliminated items that tested your suspension of disbelief.
In GTA V, there are three protagonists you can control at anytime. But, you can choose to only control one if you wish. This has been mentioned before.
It's a shame you were unable to immerse yourself in the GTA IV world. I still consider it the best PS3 experience I've had this generation.
@amar1234 its 3 not 5
@amar1234 You're insane! GTA IV was one of the best games of the decade..
Also, there's 3 playable characters, you can switch off whenever you want.
A company that actually values quality over quantity in our modern times, stands up and claps in ovation. please take note EA.
P.D cut the DRM bullshit already also.
We have to remember to take all those size quotes with a grain of salt.
All they have to do to double the playable volume of a game is double the height of the SKYBOX.
Not to mention what is going to inhabit all this supposed "space"?
I would prefer a 2004 San Andreas that has 55% interiors and four times as many places you can go to start an event added(be it mission/storyline/whatever) than a big wasteland of hollow rectangles plastered with a high-res texture and cheeky signage.
@1blackone Exactly what I was thinking when I read this. GTA:SA and RDR had lots of open spaces with nothing in them...what was the point as they rarely if ever had anything to do with the story, missions, etc.
Then you dont know what the Gta series is about do you? Those open spaces you talk about are for people to drive around in, find things, and just do random stuff. No to to mention all the legends the game has cause of those open spaces. Gta 4 was terrible in comparasion, , completely destroyed the sand box experience.
It's really sad that someone has to explain this to industry professionals.
We had all the evidence we needed with Tony Hawk and Guitar Hero.
Capcom, EA, Activision are the worst and added to this list Ubisoft with the AC series. Quality will always beat Quantity. These companies I mention will never get it as long as fanboys keep support them. They will never stop miking the series.
EA's official response: Spending more time making games to ensure quality? You'll never make money that way. You can't be profitable giving gamers what they want, you have to blame them for all the money you didn't make.
Content you might like…
Users who looked at this article also looked at these content items.
Avalanche Studios co-founder says developer's ambition is for action, not moments that make players cry; steampunk-style game on hold. Full Story
- Posted May 15, 2013 6:33 am PT
4A Games creative director Andrew Prokhorov thanks Jason Rubin for telling the studio's story, but says, "We deserve the ratings we get." Full Story
- Posted May 16, 2013 12:44 pm PT