@blackroommate Traditionally Rockstar will release the PC version some months after the initial console release, I believe piracy prevention has some part to play in it, as well as adding the odd tweak here and there.
Am I honestly the only person who just feels a bit numb regarding GTA V?
I just don't feel very excited for it, I wish I did but it just feels like it's been done to death by now. GTA 3, Vice City, and San Andreas were some of the most enjoyable gaming experiences I've ever had and I got the latter two on launch with bated breath, suffice to say I wasn't disappointed...
GTA IV however... I thought was totally overrated, once the physics and graphical improvements set in I just thought it was average from Rockstar's standards.
Rockstar blew me away 3 times last gen but now I feel like it's all gone pretty stale and overhyped to hell based on reputation alone (which is somewhat justified).
So am I alone in this? Games like Watchdogs in that free-roaming environment excite me a little more because they're adding some flavor into it, knowing that GTA V is simply resting on it's laurels with no cool niche gameplay implementation, kinda cliche characters (IMO), and everything that made GTA successful in the past just isn't enough for me to anticipate this game anymore.
....I don't find the dynamic character switching all that cool at all, although it should make for some interesting missions, I feel that everything they're marketing like bank heist missions, (like seriously, what's so exciting about bank heist missions?) the character switching, and the theme, (credit crunch, blah blah) to just be pretty counter-exciting. I don't doubt that the execution will be fantastic in terms of player control, physics, environment design etc. but is it enough?
Sleeping dogs proved that GTA is no longer the sandbox king, compared to GTA IV, Sleeping dogs significantly improved on many areas such as character movement, combat, animations and other cool authentic gameplay elements like the parkour aspect, granted there are a few years between the two in terms of release, GTA is no longer the be all and end all of third-person sandbox gaming I don't really see anything worth getting mega excited about for GTA V other than that it will be GTA we are all accustomed to and everything we expect.
Part of me is thinking this game could be a let down, all this hype and it could end up being mediocre. It all looks good from these gameplay trailers but once you start noticing repetition in-play and the novelty of "hacking" wears off you could start to get bored fast.
@Daemoroth @Tee_Mal Sorry, I misinterpreted that part. You're first reply seems to be more concerned with retailers versus developers though, so it really does come down to the devs selling these new policies in a way which benefits the end-user as well as them and the distributors. If the way they do business with the stores is unfair then it's something they should address on that level than simply doing away with used games altogether and directly affecting their buyers, a certain infrastructure is needed; price drops, sales, perhaps a virtual trading system put in place, things which require time as many others have stated, a gradual process rather than expecting to allow the consumer to suffer for what is supposedly becoming for them a bad way of doing things. So why should the consumer have to pay a used game fee (as MS intended) Have the bloody retailers pay their dues for that. Also it's silly to assume that the same game disc is circulating among millions of gamers and its getting sold again and again, every copy sold is every copy used.
I think it's really a reap what you sow scenario, if innovation existed in the first place and expensive cinematics and such did not, then perhaps there would be a much safer innovation to presentation ratio.
Indie games are some of the most innovative and exciting "think outside of the box games" out there, yet their costs are way off Ubisofts obviously, the only thing this tells me is innovation is free, I bet these guys dream about having the production costs which Ubi have, I don't honestly see what micro transactions have to do with innovation in games.....
@Daemoroth @MrOrbitz @Tee_Mal @AdamLeBlanc The fact remains, it's hard to spend full price on a game that you'd like to play and try out, people trade in and sell their previous games to subsidize the cost of a new game ALL THE TIME, so by that logic used games actually stimulate the sale of new games. Developers are filthy rich as it is, I don't know what you're getting at by defending millionaires trying to take something from the consumer that has been possible forever.
Do you know what this actually means? In the biggest scheme of things it means that if developers get their way they will lose a huge chunk of motivation to actually make great games in order to have it sell new copies, so to the contrary to whatever you're thinking it will actually have a much worse effect on the quality of games because just like any other industry they should want to strive to have their product fly off the shelves, trying to kill used games is an utter cop-out.
Who cares if they don't make profit on used games? The fact is if they make something actually good, actually worth spending full price on they will sell games, and lets not forget used games can't exist without the sale of new games in the first place so if they really want to make money the proper way they'll make sure they make a kick ass game, just watch out for GTA V and see the sickening revenue that game generates.
We shouldn't be punished in a corporate world by corporations because of their greed, what justification is there for the removal of consumer buy/trade rights? If the video game industry hurt that much because of used games then why oh why is it that it's now utterly booming, bigger than ever. Bigger than the movie industry and used games have been around since day 1.
EA's figures in 2011 were close to 4 billion dollars in total revenue, in pure profit for the fiscal year, the reason video game companies go down is because of corporate greed, because bigger companies buy them out and shut them down, or the game company made bad business decisions and bad games. Try and find one article that states that a games company folded because of used games, you won't find it because it's absurd.
When a relatively new game comes out, the used price of that game is only a few pennies cheaper for a fair amount of time, so when a game is too good to refuse people will pre-order something or they'll take the new copy over the used copy for just a few bucks difference of course, it's only when a game has been out for a while that it's actually worth buying used, so when I've nothing to play and nothing is out which I must have I'll check out some games I missed from the past which have already been sold new, which the dev has cashed-in on, now i can get it SECOND HAND for a fair price, WHAT IS WRONG WITH THAT?
Tee_Mal's comments