backtop

Print 35 comment(s) - last by Brad1979.. on Feb 5 at 7:25 PM
Official launch date is September 17

If you've been counting down the days until Grand Theft Auto V arrives, Rockstar has offered up some bad news. The game was originally expected to launch in the spring of 2013, which meant sometime in the next couple months. Rockstar has now changed that official launch date and added a significant delay.

“Grand Theft Auto V continues to push the series forward in new ways; Rockstar North are creating our deepest, most beautiful and most immersive world yet,” said Sam Houser, Founder of Rockstar Games. “We are very excited for people to learn more about the game in the coming months.”

Rockstar announced today that the official launch date for GTA V is September 17, 2013. The company admits that that is about four months later than originally planned. However, Rockstar promises that the delay will be worth it. As for the official reason the game has been delayed, Rockstar only says that the delay is to allow more development time.


Rockstar wrote, "We know this is about four months later than originally planned and we know that this short delay will come as a disappointment to many of you, but, trust us, it will be worth the extra time. GTAV is a massively ambitious and complex game and it simply needs a little more polish to be of the standard we and, more importantly, you require."

When the game launches on September 17, it will be available for the Xbox 360 and the Sony PS3. Reuters reports that some analysts believe GTA V could make as much as $1 billion in retail sales. The last game the franchise, Grand Theft Auto IV, has sold over 25 million copies since it launched in 2008.

Sources: Rockstar Games, Reuters


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
PS4?
By BioHazardous on 2/1/2013 11:09:05 AM , Rating: 3
I wonder if it has something to do with the PS4!




RE: PS4?
By Netscorer on 2/1/2013 12:24:11 PM , Rating: 2
Given that RockStar states a release date, I doubt it would be a launch title for the next generation of consoles. They will probably rely on a much better established current console foothold then to try to be a marketing leader for PS4 and Xbox720.


RE: PS4?
By BioHazardous on 2/1/2013 12:42:34 PM , Rating: 2
I didn't mean to imply they wouldn't release it for the PS3 and Xbox360. Just wondering if the delayed timing had something to do with making it also work (but be more awesome) on PS4 and Xbox720.


RE: PS4?
By Quadrillity on 2/1/2013 1:12:56 PM , Rating: 2
Nah, but I bet the newest Metal Gear in development will be a launch title.


RE: PS4?
By TakinYourPoints on 2/2/2013 6:05:20 AM , Rating: 2
Who knows, but I don't think so. There's always crossover of some sort between the old gen and new gen. Look at God Of War 2 when it came out in 2007, it stood up surprisingly well against XBox 360 games that came out around the same time.


By lamerz4391 on 2/1/2013 11:26:05 AM , Rating: 2
Sounds like the time we might see a new console release.

Y'know, just ahead of the holiday season?




Not too bad
By Quadrillity on 2/1/2013 1:17:04 PM , Rating: 2
4 months is nothing really... I would MUCH rather them take the time to make it right than to rush an unfinished game to market.

And I bet it's to include that "gotta have" feature that they thought of at the last second.




!!!!!!!
By TinaHiggs22 on 2/3/2013 1:51:40 PM , Rating: 2
Levi. although Roger`s article is inconceivable... last friday I got a great Mitsubishi Evo from earning $9187 this munth and over $10,000 lass month. this is definitely the most-comfortable work I have ever done. I started this 3 months ago and pretty much straight away got minimum $81.. per hour. I follow the instructions here, Fox76.comCHECK IT OUT




Sorry, but without a PC port
By darkfalz on 2/4/2013 4:16:07 AM , Rating: 2
"Most beautiful" is already a lie.

Seriously, I fired up GTA IV XBox 360 side by side with the PC version running 1080P / FXAA. The Xbox version looked like a PS1 game by comparison. Release a port for a platform that isn't 7 years old, or don't get my business, simple as that.




Or maybe?
By Fidget on 2/4/2013 12:48:39 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe they need the extra time to work on making a combat control system that doesn't actually suck?

Nah, you guys are probably right, it's probably cuz of the PS4




Sandy Hook
By Brad1979 on 2/5/2013 7:25:59 PM , Rating: 2
I wonder if this has anything to do with giving some time for the emotion of Sandy Hook to die down before release?




Take all the time you need...
By quiksilvr on 2/1/13, Rating: -1
RE: Take all the time you need...
By ShaolinSoccer on 2/1/13, Rating: -1
RE: Take all the time you need...
By datdamonfoo on 2/1/2013 10:43:38 AM , Rating: 2
There's a chance it will eventually be on PC.
http://www.examiner.com/article/new-details-indica...


RE: Take all the time you need...
By maugrimtr on 2/5/2013 6:14:29 AM , Rating: 2
GTA games are always on PC. It just takes an additional 6 months to improve the graphics to the point that someone with a PC doesn't think it's a bad joke. So expect a release sometime in March 2014 for PC (maybe later).

I also hope it's more like San Andreas. Yes, it had lots of "empty" spaces. It was hugely enjoyable to explore all of that off-road or on (parachute optional :P). We had planes, helicopters, TANKS. The exploration and sandbox nature of that game meant I played it for far longer than GTA "Middle Of The City And Many Straight Roads". I drove every damn road in San Andreas and the graphics, while low end, never once made the game feel stale or old. A truly great game can run pixellated to Hell and not bother you.


By maugrimtr on 2/5/2013 6:16:21 AM , Rating: 2
Dammit, now I want to get out San Andreas and take the old boy for another run. Fill in some time while I wait for GTA V :).


RE: Take all the time you need...
By Ammohunt on 2/1/2013 11:19:45 AM , Rating: 4
$60 is too much for a game period. I spent $17.99 on Arma 2 Combined Operations to play the Dayz mod 144 hours played...which is a new record for me. When will the game companies learn that you make your money in volume. Honestly during these economic times i will not pay $60 for any game.


RE: Take all the time you need...
By RufusM on 2/1/2013 11:40:51 AM , Rating: 2
If I look at the value of a $60 game of this type of caliber it's usually pretty good. If you can spend 60 hours having a great time playing it, that's only $1/hr for fun time without having to go anywhere. I spend more than that on most other forms of entertainment. I don't game as much any more either, so so I just pick a few games I really want to play every year.

On the other hand, if you want to wait until it's discounted you can buy a used one a few months after release for probably $20-30 depending on the market.


RE: Take all the time you need...
By Ammohunt on 2/1/2013 11:50:13 AM , Rating: 2
Its been awhile since i have seen a game worth $60 factor that i have 3 other gamers in the house that might want to play. So $60 x 4 busts my entertainment budget real quick. Compare that to say Minecraft $26 x 4 money well spent My whole family can play for $100 thats an extremely good good value and perhaps the reason Minecraft is going gang busters right now.


RE: Take all the time you need...
By Flunk on 2/1/2013 12:58:20 PM , Rating: 2
Try borderlands 2, I think I've put 80 hours into that one at this point and I'm starting another playthrough.

Besides, it's highly subjective. I got bored of Minecraft really fast.


RE: Take all the time you need...
By HostileEffect on 2/1/2013 1:59:07 PM , Rating: 2
It doesn't matter if its a game or movie. $60 is too much for anything other than a well done collectors edition. Ex, World of Warcraft set or complete Startrek collection.

I recently got a reminder on why I stopped buying anything other than media proven to be worth the dollar. Bought a show on DVD thinking it was the full season, find out in the small print on the back its only episodes 1-4. Got the season one in full 1080 else were.

I hope GTA is worth the price they ask, I still have memories of ripping up Vice City.


RE: Take all the time you need...
By SPOOFE on 2/1/2013 4:02:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
$60 is too much for anything other than a well done collectors edition.

Nonsense. I spent $60 on Skyrim at launch and totally got far more than my money's worth, even without any mods.

If it's not worth $60 TO YOU, well, that's a significantly different statement.


RE: Take all the time you need...
By RufusM on 2/1/2013 4:51:12 PM , Rating: 3
It all depends on the games you value.

For me Skyrim and Far Cry 3 are worth the $60/game admission. Many hours of fun over months and months is hard to beat for that kind of price. I wouldn't pay $60/game for a racing game or a fighting game though. For me, those just don't have the value.

The most I paid for a game was $95 for Shining Force 2 back in the Genesis day. I played that for countless hours then so it was worth it to me.


By Ammohunt on 2/1/2013 3:03:57 PM , Rating: 2
Thats funny borderlands 2 was the game i was considering forking out the cash for before i found DayZ.


RE: Take all the time you need...
By ShaolinSoccer on 2/2/2013 12:55:04 AM , Rating: 2
Are you kidding? I been buying brand new games for less than $5 through Steam, Origin and Gamefly. Not to mention I wait for new top console games to be at LEAST $20 before buying. I haven't bought a "used" game in years. Can you imagine how much money I have saved over the years buy not being that guy who thinks he needs to have the latest and greatest thing for $60 right when it comes out? Games aren't drugs. You don't "need" to buy them on day 1.


By HostileEffect on 2/3/2013 3:30:07 AM , Rating: 2
If you intend to play only the single player portion then no you don't need to be there on day one. If you want to play multiplayer then you do need to be there at launch or your getting left in the dust and the game will be cheated up and barren by the time it reaches the cheap bin.


RE: Take all the time you need...
By augiem on 2/1/2013 1:34:39 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
When will the game companies learn that you make your money in volume. Honestly during these economic times i will not pay $60 for any game.


Do you know how much it costs and how much time it takes to develop a game? In order to get the volume to drive the prices down where you want them, the games have to be dumbed down even further for the masses, because there just aren't enough hardcore gamers out there to support your desired price point. Mega volume sales in games is being done right now. It's called mobile gaming, and look at what you get. Every company has to move to the freemium because they simply cannot survive. Enough said. Everyone wants to have their cake and eat it too. I know.


RE: Take all the time you need...
By Ammohunt on 2/1/2013 3:08:08 PM , Rating: 2
I have some idea since i work for one of the top 3 software companies on the planet ;-). Most of the cost is marketing but word of mouth is better than most marketing schemes if the game is good. Steam i have come to realize is the best distribution mechanism for games. I have befriended 2 younger gamers in steam that i play with regularly something have never done in the past they have introduced me to even more games.


RE: Take all the time you need...
By augiem on 2/1/2013 4:21:54 PM , Rating: 1
Relying on word of mouth to sell your product is not sound business. That's like relying on the rain. No modern business reached the heights they have on word of mouth except maybe for the fad du jour such as Facebook.

Saying most of the cost of developing games is marketing is also a blanket statement and certainly not true for every game. Cost of development is very high these days as is evidenced by the trend for developers to outsource more and more content creation and programming to overseas developers to reduce costs. Regardless, marketing is required for any business to succeed and is not unique to the game industry, so it can't be blown off as an unnecessary cost.

The economics have to make sense. If the market were there to support AAA game development costs at $20/game, that would be the base price already. There's always someone out there who tries to get a leg up on the competition by out-cheaping them, which would drive the prices lower, provided they made up for it in volume. And in a sense that actually HAS happened already. How much were we paying for games in the 80's? $50 was common on NES and Sega systems. The 90's? $60-$80. How much are we paying now? $40-$60. Take a look at present day value of those figures. We pay a LOT less for games than we did back then. The number of gamers out there is much bigger than it was in the 80's, but still nowhere near as big as the number of people who watch movies. You want that volume, you gotta get more people playing games. How do you do that? Make them accessible to non gamers. How do you do that? Farmville.

Lowering the base price for a PS3 game to $20 wouldn't suddenly generate a market of buyers 3 times as big, which would be required to recoup the costs. You would either need to have an installed user base 3x the size of present, which would mean more PS3's would need to be sold, or you'd have to get your product in the hands of a much higher percentage of the existing user base to make up the difference. Both are monumental tasks with many factors out of the control of the developer.


RE: Take all the time you need...
By LRonaldHubbs on 2/1/2013 1:43:41 PM , Rating: 2
I disagree. I can think of at least three games I have spent $60 on and would gladly have spent more.

Borderlands 1 - 532 hours played = 11 cents/hour
Borderlands 2 - 248 hours played (so far) = 24 cents/hour
Skyrim - 307 hours played = 20 cents/hour


RE: Take all the time you need...
By chizow on 2/1/2013 2:14:33 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah those are all great games that are well worth it, I'd really like to see publishers provide alternative forms of payment as well that rewards the good games and punishes the bad ones rather than punishing the customers.

I'd prefer to see an escalating pay-to-play system that eventually caps out that benefits everyone. Less risk to tepid buyers and more reward to developers who put out great games. Something to the extent of:

$10 trial purchase, 30 days unlimited play.
$10 per additional month or 100 hours playtime.
$50 charge cap and you go to lifetime unlimited.

This would cover pretty much every scenario for the vast majority of gamers and in the long run, encourage more PC gamers to buy and try their games. Devs/publishers might not make as much per sale, but there's the potential to make exponentially more money with that $10 low-risk carrot, especially if the game is really good.


RE: Take all the time you need...
By Rukkian on 2/1/2013 3:02:02 PM , Rating: 2
That sounds good to me (and probably alot of gamers) as most games, I get I clear in a month or 2, get bored and move on. I don't think it would be that good for a new game. If you are talking ones that are close to bargain bin, or a game that people will likely play for years, then maybe.


By Lord 666 on 2/2/2013 1:55:40 PM , Rating: 2
How many Mountain Dews/Monsters/Red Bulls did you consume during that same period? Or have you moved onto stronger stuff?


By inperfectdarkness on 2/2/2013 9:41:53 AM , Rating: 1
You must be joking. Let's forget all about games like Doom, Half-Life, Starcraft, etc. Nope, GTA:SA must be the greatest game of all time. :p


!!!!
By KateHiggs22 on 2/1/13, Rating: -1
"Nowadays you can buy a CPU cheaper than the CPU fan." -- Unnamed AMD executive











botimage
Copyright 2013 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki