Rockstar games are exactly a complicated beast to predict. Not anymore. If we were to compare studios and their mannerisms to bosses from Souls-Like games- you'd have companies like Larian pulling up like 'Shadow of the Erdtree' major bosses, slapping you with multi-combos, roll catches and back-of-pocket lighting moves you never even knew that boss had after twenty attempts! Rockstar, on the otherhand, would be a miniboss from Lords of the Fallen. Gimmicky, with a couple of easily baitable combos that can be spammed over and over and over again. (I'm really digging into Lords lately, aren't I? That game has not left a good impression on me at all.) Which is to say, I'm actually a little surprised that this recent controversy with Rockstar is even a thing because, well, come on! You didn't know Rockstar buries art for money?
I'm talking of course about the single player DLC for Grand Theft Auto V. That's right, there was actually meant to be single player DLC and it wasn't a Zombie DLC despite the multiple years worth of bait-channels promising that with every other update. (Early Youtube- what a time to be young and dumb!) 'Special Agent Trevor' isn't exactly a secret within the community and I think people had already discussed the possibility that some of the surprise spy-content in GTA Online was actually repurposed single player content but I suppose that became a bit more concrete recently and old wounds opened up. Like a whistleblower coming out to declare that the Cambrian Explosion was actually a Pfizer cover-up job like we've suspected all these years. (Hmm? You haven't heard that conspiracy? Oh it goes deep, let me tell you!)
The revelation that some people are grappling with is the fact that indeed the quality of content presented in the base game of Grand Theft Auto V was purposefully ignored in order to feed the endless juggernaut of the online platform because that is, in the words of the man himself, their "Cash cow". I've said it before but GTA Online makes a sickening amount of money year in and year out, to the point where all those people worrying about Grand Theft Auto suddenly raising their prices to $100 or $150 as was off handily remarked a while back would be a frankly ludicrous proposition- because that would get in the way of the team getting their money printing device for the next decade in as many hands as possible. They would be literally setting fire to their own money- it's never going to happen!
But I mean- it's not exactly rocket science to realise that GTA single player had floundered in the face of Online. Just take into account the fact that after only a couple of updates worth of support GTA Online simply stopped porting their new cars to GTA V- despite the fact they could have easily been injected into the traffic formula in order to make single player exploration more diverse and interesting. Partially it could be argued that the choice was made in order to limit people's ability to 'pre test' these new cars and decided whether or not they want to commit through online. Buyers remorse is king to these kinds of people. But the truth is likely just frank laziness. Why bother when it doesn't translate into direct profit for the company? What's 'integrity' mean again?
Although I do understand the realisation that if this definitely was the case- Rockstar did, in-fact, axe content in order to feed the beast at least once- who's to say they haven't done it again? Could it be that the supposed zombie expansion was at least discussed before the successes of GTA Online killed those ambitions? Let it not be forgotten that one half of the Houser brother duo who started Rockstar to begin with left during the period of GTA Online's success leading towards the release of Red Dead Redemption. Could one factor contributing to that be seeing the direction that the company was headed- where resources were being devoted and no longer finding the spark of fun in being involved with it all? Could that be?
And what's worse- could this be the direction we have to face in the future too? Is the release of GTA 6 going to effectively be the end of support for the single player game as Rockstar happily turn towards the new and improved cash cow with dollar signs in their eyes- giddy at the prospect of an open world infrastructure, this time designed from the literal ground-up to absorb as much extra income off the player as possible? I mean we've already seen Red Dead Online get it's support totally pulled because the team couldn't figure out a way to make it profitable enough after the first year, throwing out the baby with the bathtub in that regard.
There is certainly room for both in this world, should the powers that be decide it's worth pursuing. Even the designer who commented on this in the first place attested that Rockstar could very well have chosen to support both at the same time. Now being even bigger than they were before, Rockstar could very well decide to do so this time around- or they could sink that extra talent into squeezing more easily monetizable online crap. Aside from the common-sense argument, we also have the fact that Rockstar just recently introduced a bevy of long requested quality of life features and then locked them behind the subscription paywall- so they certainly haven't gotten any better with business practices over the years.
I think Rockstar is a company of two halfs, one being a world class developer that developers non-stop masterpieces and the other being an opportunistic waste-of-space that milks all the framework left over by the real artists for a quick buck. And that perception has survived the entirety of GTA Online's life cycle, throughout Rockstar's life cycle and I have no reason to believe anything significant will change going forward. At least not in the 'player friendly' direction. Just remember the Rockstar we care about and support their efforts, and spit on the Rockstar who seems very eager to do so back.
No comments:
Post a Comment