Naturally. Rockstar likes to resell their titles no less than Bethesda. They will sell it to you on PS5 and series x/s, then again on PS6 and whatever Xbox will be around. Then probably Nintendo platform, finally PC.
This way they maximize the amount of times some people will buy the same game, each time with minimal quality upgrade.
Same as their previous titles. It’s not that they didn’t learn. They have the numbers and know very well what they’re doing.
imo buying a copy for one platform should entitle to play on every platform it is released on. The crucial aspects of the work are the same. adapting to different hardwares and making controls for gamepads and mouse and keyboard only plays a small part in the total effort. Also you can play with a controller on pc in most cross platform games.
Sure, but GTA 6 is 100% already working on PC. Not just because they develop the game on PC, or because they’re building on top of the RDR2 engine (which is already ported to PC), but because they planned to support PC from the beginning, and that type of engine work usually gets ironed out early during development or in pre-production.
I was just pointing out the flaw in your tire analogy though. TBH I’m not saying they should give free copies to people who bought it on other platforms. That’s unprecedented for giant publishers like this. But I am pissed that they’re delaying the PC version since you can be sure it’s a calculated plan to ensure PC gamers buy the game twice. They collected enough analytics and surveys to know that a significant amount of GTA5 PC gamers also own a next-gen console. It’s all very nefarious.
That’s not how game development using an engine works… RAGE likely compiles code for at minimum a majority of modern computer hardware with next to no tweaking, and probably the same with Xbox & PlayStation consoles.
Most game engines used on large projects generally are made to handle as much of a variety of hardware as possible with little to no changes in the code – if you make a game using Unreal Engine or Unity for example it will almost certainly be able to work on Xbox, Playstation, and most PCs just fine. Most of the performance optimization for different hardware can then be offloaded to the engine. It’s likely the same with RAGE.
I actually have experience porting games and engines to consoles. If it runs on a development PC (likely Windows), they have the build system and platform layer implemented, which is the hardest part. Porting the content is also an important step, but really only for consoles, which usually have limited memory and power.
Typically the only problem with “PC ports” today is when the game wasn’t designed around mouse/keyboard, or when the devs didn’t make an effort to optimize it on consumer specs (although nowadays console architecture isn’t too different from PCs so there are more optimizations that work across platforms). Another potential problem is when the game gets a lot of last minute hacks to fix bugs in order to ship on a console and those hacks don’t survive a platform transition, then the publisher just tells them to ship as is since there’s no certification process on PC. Basically, the problems are almost always logistical/business decisions due to a lazy/cheap publisher.
None of that is going to apply to this game. Rockstar has always intended to ship and fully support PC from the beginning. They had the technology, the talent, the incentive, and the time to do it. The most realistic explanation (IMO) for the PC delay is that they’re trying to double-dip.
As much as I theoretically agree, I can immediately think of two problems:
The storefronts would have to communicate
It’s against their own interest to do this. Imagine you buy all your games on Steam because of the sales (although the creators of the game of course decide the prices, but still) and then play them on your Xbox. No profit at all for Microsoft, yet they’re the ones providing all the additional services like the actual game hosting, friends system, etc. It’s not much by any means, but it does add up. The money all goes to Valve. You could even buy the games via the Steam mobile app if you don’t even own a PC. Also, even if they were theoretically fine with this, even coordinating it would be a pain. Since you could put a game on the Google Play Store, the App Store, hell maybe even F-Droid, Epic Games, GoG, Steam, the Xbox Store, and the Play Station store, and I am absolutely certain I forgot multiple other options, all of them would need to be able to communicate and decide on if you actually own the game. This would be a logistical and technical nightmare.
Companies would just sell mildly different versions and claim it’s a new game
You know how for example Undertale has a slightly special Nintendo Switch version where there’s… I can’t even remember, but I think it’s an additional boss. That’s just something small and cute, but let’s go with the GTA example. I have played about five hours of 5 and dropped it, so excuse me if this isn’t the best theoretical example, but let’s say the PS5 and Series X/S get the base game. Then the PS6 and new Xbox get maybe five additional cars and the game they’re selling is GTA 6 Expanded. Afterwards on switch (although by that time Nintendo’s new console would’ve released) you get blue and red weapon skins or whatever and it’s GTA 6 Switched Up. And then finally on PC you get the GTA 6 Ultimate Edition with expanded settings, better graphics, and maybe five more cars on top of those from GTA 6 Expanded. These are all technically not the same game, so you would not be able to claim them. Sure, you could argue they’re similar, but where is the exact line? That’s quite impossible to figure out - is it a cheated rehash or a mediocre remaster? Who knows
Because a PC can do everything a console can do, but way better, plus way more, lol
Consoles are completely redundant, you can get a better performing PC for the same price or lower if you wait for sales (especially when you consider the $60-120/year premium you have to pay to play console games online, Microsoft & Sony sell consoles at a loss because they know they’ll suck way more money out of you from subscriptions & other “fees” you experience from console)
Consoles are just shit value, you can’t use them for anything other than what, gaming and TV? And their specs are worth less than just buying similar parts separately and putting them together. So why would I spend up to $500 plus $80 every year on a shitty console just to play a new game because of artificial exclusives that will come to PC anyways? Assuming you use your PS5 or Xbox Series X or whatever for 6-7 years, that’s $1000 down the drain. And then after that you’ll still have to spend a few hundred on a laptop or PC or whatever to, you know, do your job or uni or whatever, because your console that costs over $500 can’t do any of that.
The one thing consoles have had for a long time over PC is physical disks. Fuck what I wouldnt do to have non-steam required disks. Btw I know itd be slow I dont care.
I didn’t know console games had subscription costs in ways the PC equivalents don’t. I’m a PC gamer myself, and wouldn’t buy a console precisely because it’s a unitasker. But the one task it does do well is couch gaming with a controller, and that’s not how I’d use a PC. Fair, if that’s someone’s thing, but I would just think a console was better for that usecase.
There’s not really anything that makes using your PC in the same way inconvenient, you can connect it to your TV and wirelessly connect controllers, even more conveniently. Although switching between games or using different apps while doing so means you’d have to have a m&kb beside you I think, so if you’re playing with friends it might be less convenient (personally I only use controller on games that are unplayable on M&KB though, mainly emulated games)
If you only play that particular game with a controller, sure. My point was that if you’re a controller player, I’d think you’d have a better time on a console, since they and their games are made for it. Mouse and keyboard controls with key remapping are the biggest reason I play on PC.
Some people i used to play battlefield with played infantry and ground vehicles with mouse and keyboard but used a controller for planes and helicopters.
I could also see controllers to be nicer for racing games and simiiar considerations. At the end of the day even a pure controller player still needs a PC for non gaming. So might as well have one device for everything.
I did, and I think you misunderstand, I am glad that it had tits and ass everywhere, Rockstar aren’t the rock stars they used to be. Did you see that Grand Theft Auto remastered?
I am actually glad Grand Theft Auto VI has decided that women are allowed to look feminine, what a novel fucking concept am I right? Female characters looking like they’re actually female.
Yes I understand that it’s a cartoon exaggeration of what a woman looks like, I don’t care, Grand Theft Auto is supposed to be a violent cartoon, let it be one. Fuck
I am not entirely sure that is “profit focused”. It’s profit on a real world situation, you said it yourself - less QA work which makes it able to release faster. They are only taking advantage of that fact. They would have to focus on not profit for it to happen any other way.
Because they know most PC gamers have at least one console as well, and they’ll buy it on release at full price, and then again on PC for the better gaming experience.
Cause idiots literally go out and buy a console , then get the game there, then get it again on their PC in 18 months and literally foam at the mouth all the while.
Remember these publishers are in an ouroboros style circle jerk with console makers. They move without giving a tug, and never move without getting a tug. They go console exclusive to boost console sales in the first year, use that time to continue to improve the half baked game, then release on PC with higher specs to reap the PC fans marveling at the higher graphics.
This is stupid because they literally developed the damn game on PC. The only reason to do a console priority release is artificial scarcity. They know a certain subset of PC gamers will buy the game twice. Once on console for FOMO. And again on PC for the proper experience.
As much as I understand the disappointment, from development point I tolerate them as Rockstar ever since they had their own in house Game Engine, they does not shoehorn the game into a mess of unplayablility (see common AAA studios). Not to mention those jack of all trade engine (e.g UE, Unity, CryEngine) while you can make the project multiplatform, the optimization that need to be done is far more time consuming (reading the docs of the SDK) compared to an Engine you build your own, an example of this on recent release is Yakuza Ishin, Ishin use Unreal Engine and run worse compared to every Yakuza games they released prior (which they did use their in-house game Engine).
Rockstar made it clear focus on to deliver console optimization on front ever since GTA III released (technical standpoint see GTA San Andreas on PS2, GTA V on PS3 and X360, Max Payne 3 on console).
Even though from PS4/XONE we have x86 arch console, the uniformity of console specs leads the easy to work on optimization rather than plethora of hardwares that available on Personal Computer space.
Maybe I am sounded defending Rockstar but I gave my opinion from my past experience as game modder so knowing those SDK a bit. If you want to blame, you can blame the higher up on T2 since those parties the one tied up the Rockstar (R* owned by T2). I do have a share of disappointment when they took down the Reverse Engineered code of 3D era gta codes, but that incident also have grey area as some says that some portion of the code are part of original code.
Thanks for the drop of sanity here. There are reasons this happens and this right here is why. Console is ready faster…that’s it. Rockstar is just making the natural business decisions given the situation. Does Rockstar also get that double dip? Yes. Do they get incentives from the various console companies vying for exclusivity? Yes. Villainize that all you want but the other option is choosing to not make money on a finished game by making it unavailable for literally no reason.
Inversely, for those complaining, demanding Rockstar to not release a finished game on any platform until it is available on the device you prefer sounds pretty stupid.
The VAST majority of people play this kind of game on console.
PC has infinite configurations and therefore is harder to test for.
That’s it. It’s way more work for way less users. When they release for Xbox and PS5, they are basically testing against two fixed PC builds, and that’s it. The other stuff is a factor, but a minor factor at most. Those are the two big reasons, everything else is an afterthought, and there is no big conspiracy at play.
Plus, literally every Rockstar game in modern history has been released on console first and then PC, if it gets a PC release at all. Why would this be any different?
This is coming from someone who never played RDR1 because at the time I refused to play anything not on PC, so I understand wanting it. But you can want/hope that it happens and still accept the reality without inventing a conspiracy as to why they chose not to target it.
To put it simply, people nowaday spoiled with choices while they wanted needlessly to be served what they want.
Back in earlier gaming era (90s and 00s), console exclusive and PC exclusive is a thing and no one even complain, people back then accept the fact that mostly game are only available on Consoles, and those that released on Computer are mostly Online/LAN games or MMOs, This trend continue until late 00s where some of console games get ported to PC because there is demand.
Pushing through 10s, PC is relevant as the cost of the system is almost same (or even cheaper) compared to the console, back then you can build gaming pc out of dell optiplex and slap a 750 or 750 Ti and you’ll get something similar to PS4/XONE performance. Once it gets to late 10s where entry price of PC is a bit high (you can thank Intel for keeping re-releasing 14nm up to 6 generations and then Ryzen came) if you want to have more FPS and prettier graphics on PC.
Now in the 20s, we have tons of hardware variation that can play a game ranging from components from 2014 that still holding up although struggling to get 30/60fps, to something workspace component that can run games 144 FPS+ on casual games. Heck you can even run game without owning the hardware by streaming them (GeForce Now)
In my opinion these people probably those who back then owned consoles and jump ship to PC and expecting same treatment as console player. And of course you cannot guarantee A PC (without specify its components) to run games as much as I encountered some kids tried to run AAA games on their school laptops that had Intel Celeron with dinky 4GB of RAM, while on console it is definite to run as it was mean to run games.
Yeah, to put it constructive criticism, seeing Rockstar re-releasing GTA V three times that makes people mad is understandable, but to be fair people who owned PS4/PS5 that want to play GTA V/Online back then no way they would patch backward compatibility themselves specifically on PS4, the difference was “night and day” compared on PS3. While I did not have newer console upward from PS2, I would treat those improvement and the online availability as service that runs by R* and legally they able to charge you (but the end decision was on each own right?).
Simply to be put, if someone want to blame whom, blame the system and the people. These entities follows business rule and they serve from the demand, as funny as it sounds the demand is from each individual, that’s why vote with your wallet is make sense for consumable product, similar to (underaged) children who play games and spending their parents CC, the parent is to put the blame because they could not control their kid or even bother to parenting.
Console gamers will buy the game on each following generation console as well for the next couple decades and when I’m on my death bed we will get a release announcement for the trailer of GTA 7 for PS? and Xbox xXx series xXx ex/se
suspect pc is last priority due to the higher rate of piracy and lower rate of in-app-purchases. oh and the mod scene - for some reason rock* doesn’t want people extending the lives of their products even for single player play. weeeeeak.
PC releasing at the same time might just rob consoles of sales they could have. While I don’t support what they do, this is what I think the most logical reason
In my view this is short sighted. A game with this many systems in it may actually need time to be decently optimised for keyboard and mouse inputs. When GTAV finally released it also carried a bunch of improvements. R* doesn’t want to sell games consoles. They don’t make any.
It needs to be “optimized” for controller input in exactly the same way. They could’ve chosen to budget for this “optimization” (whatever that even means) pre-launch.
I think the most likely explanations are 1) larger player base on consoles, 2) Rockstar wants to get the release cash injection ASAP, and 3) staggering platform releases like this prolongs buzz and even leads to a bunch of people buying the game twice.
Unless it’s either PS5 or Xbox exclusive (not both), I don’t think that’s true. Sony and Microsoft wouldn’t collude to prevent launch on PC. That’s extremely illegal, even for companies that are masters of dodging antitrust laws.
The most realistic explanation (IMO) is that Rockstar did their research and found that most PC players also own a console, and will very likely buy the game twice in the long run.
Or if we’re being charitable, maybe the game needs more optimization work before it can run well on the Steam deck, and they want that working before launching on PC.
With GTAV, the original release was 2013, the next gen was 2014 and PC 2015 so I forsee it being the same and being even later.
The upside was that the PC port was really good at release and I’m pretty indifferent to if I pick this game up in 2030 when it’s actually a good value on PC.
I’m confused why Kotaku mentioning next gen in the title when Rockstar only commented on current generation PS5 and Xbox Series X/S.
Because they’re still referring to PS5 and XSX as “next gen”, which is ridiculous this far into a generation. I’m glad even their own commenters are calling that out.
The only reason I clicked on the article is because I thought next gen launching late 2025 with GTA6. Ps5 came out over 3 years ago so 4 year generation sounds about right.
It’s not the first time either. Time to pop Kotaku into the block list.
Yeah, we’ve not had a generation run short for 20 years. Even then most last 6 years historically and I think people’s perception is skewed because Microsoft rushed out the 360 quicker than normal.
What would new consoles even be at this stage? They’re still fast, can do 4k, some ray tracing etc. and yeah they compromise on things but you need to spend more on a graphics card alone to get more on PC. The cost vs benefit isn’t there yet not to mention (anecdotally) the “general public” talk about current consoles as if they’re new, so I don’t think there’s an apatite or need.
We’ve only just got to the point where games don’t run on PS4 any more.
Current gen has good SSDs, 16GB RAM, fast CPUs and 4K (or at least scale to 4K acceptably) graphics. Most stuff runs at 60fps (with an option to turn on the graphical wankery and drop to 30-40), and when it doesn’t there’s VRR to paper over the cracks.
The only area it’s really lacking is RT performance, and only nVidia are there right now. The pricing for cards capable of dropping old lighting paths entirely (e.g. for Cyberpunk Overdrive mode) is obscene. Frame generation is a red herring. It won’t make games feel more responsive. Only real frames can do that. We’re a long way from dropping traditional lighting.
Nah there’s not rules for “gens” it’s all bullshit that could be anywhere between 3 to 7 years looking at wiki release tables. Now especially new generation is super easy to release as consoles are just PCs.
Four years isn’t enough time for technology to develop and make a significantly more powerful console, that would be like buying a new 1100 dollar phone because they made the camera slightly better and the battery not as shit.
Consoles aren’t just PC’s, their physical architecture is completely different. Even if it was the same, I wouldn’t go out and build a completely new PC every four years because that would be a waste of money. I wouldn’t even notice a difference on most games.
We have no idea what kind of hardware will be released, tech can go through all kinds of spikes even if seems to have leveled out. So while I agree the next generation or even future generations for awhile after that won’t significantly improve in 4 years, I disagree with the sentiment. Also:
Consoles aren’t just PC’s, their physical architecture is completely different.
I bet its because console players are far more likely to dump their life savings into Shark Cards 2.0 in massive fits of hysterical FOMO, than PC players are.
Is this type of comment helpful for you? Are people supposed to follow-up with some comment about PC players are sheep and will be buy the game for consoles and then buy it PC when it releases there?
"Hyperbole" is just a euphemism for strawman. No one said PC players don't buy shark cards. You made their argument look ridiculous by misrepresenting what they said. That isn't a good faith argument to begin with.
I never said they didnt. But PC can be modded and exploited much easier than consoles can, Which can impact their sales of blatant bullshit ripoff micro transactions.
Can impact, but likely not a huge one. Just like how most people playing Skyrim are playing without mods, most people playing GTA games aren’t going to bother with mods and modded servers.
Just like how most people playing Skyrim are playing without mods
Doubt.
Edit to expand: I honestly don’t think I would’ve played it if it wasn’t for mods. The interface is so blatantly consoley and clunky that every action takes way more effort than it needs to.
The likelyhood of a console player buying MTX and a pc player buying MTX is IMO more likely biased towards console.
There certainly are whales on all platforms but mobile doesnt count right now.
Lol, every pc gamer I’ve ever encountered has to have the latest video card due to FOMO. The thought of only getting 59 FPS keeps them up at night, keeps them from playing the games they’ve already paid for.
I don’t think he needs a source - it is a fear. And not an entirely unreasonable one. Hell, car companies are chasing subscription payments for seat warmers in actual cars… the guy is a bastion of sanity.
Support bullshit and you'll eventually get what you supported.
When GTA loses its single player or riddles it with more mtx and live service crap, you'll only have yourself to blame for continuing to buy their crap.
So, in order to maybe not want to play future GTA titles in some theoretical future, you shouldn’t play current GTA titles in order to discourage Rockstar from releasing these theoretical games?
Every live service game that makes money helps establish an industry standard. I'd rather Rockstar go out of business and have no GTA games if it means sending that message.
If you buy a SP game and they add MTX after thr fact, did you support the implementation of MTX?
If we get a SP campaign and don’t play MP it will certainly be reflected in their data.
And believe: They will abso-fucking-lutely track the telemetry data out of it.
The amount of work and passion Rockstar brings into their single player experiences is by far worth the money. Bethesda needs to take a lesson from them.
Yes, they milk the multiplayer online experience for as much as they can get, but they are still working on new games in the meantime.
PS is always “millions of iterations of current, next, last, the previous, the one before that and the one after that” gen. I believe they have learned.
kotaku.com
Aktywne