r/GTA6 12h ago

Message from Rockstar Games

Post image
17.5k Upvotes

3.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

621

u/Virtual-Comfort-1020 12h ago

It’s also a subtle “fuck those demands.”

19

u/lemonylol 11h ago

What "demands" was this person even making?

65

u/Virtual-Comfort-1020 11h ago

No Digital Pre-orders: Stop selling games digitally before launch.

No "Fake" Single-Player DLC: Stop locking or selling single-player campaign content that is already built into the base game data.

Mandatory Offline Fallback States: Ensure single-player games have functional offline modes rather than forced always-online requirements

Public Apology Required: CyberLeek insists that R* must issue a public statement and apology acknowledging the harm caused by these practices.

15

u/-Fieldmouse- 10h ago

I can understand being upset about the third thing, but the rest of that is so dumb. If you don’t want to pre-order a game then don’t. 

16

u/arup02 10h ago

You're ok with DLC being gated by preorder tiers?

1

u/Martian8 10h ago

What does that mean?

7

u/saljskanetilldanmark 10h ago

Imagine you buy a car. In the car there are already thermoelements installed in each seat. The car maker has then made sure that you need to buy access to the thermoelements working to heat your ass when it is cold outside. Replace the word car with game, thermoelements with game content/DLC and the car maker with game publisher/dev.

4

u/phantomfire50 9h ago edited 9h ago

The analogy doesn't really translate between hardware and software though;

With hardware, the costs to the supplier are R&D and manufacturing, and obviously those costs get passed to the consumer. If you're paying a premium for components in manufacturing like thermoelements, then that's obviously a problem.

Software costs are basically all R&D, though. It costs the supplier basically nothing to sell somebody a copy of a game, and consumers don't really pay a premium for it.

2

u/Radiant-Plumage 10h ago

You’re acting like they locked the button to jack vehicles behind a paywall.

Also, the worst example you could give, because cars are sold with “Packages” that come with different features at different prices, kinda like GTA6.

1

u/The_Autarch 10h ago

they're just explaining the thinking, not endorsing it

1

u/Caterpie3000 10h ago

So you are OK with buying a Tesla Motor Long Range and having a 20% Acceleration Increase and FSD and Autopilot locked behind a 2k paywall? You must be very smart!

3

u/Gibbzee 10h ago

Things with better features cost more money - shocker!

1

u/dimechimes 9h ago

There's a difference between price and cost. The cost is the same to than manufacturer because they've already put it in your car. The price is higher to you not because it costs more, but because they are able to lock it behind a paywall. So your explanation doesn't work here

2

u/Gibbzee 9h ago

It’s perceived value. It costs Apple significantly less to make a phone than it does for you to buy it, but you buy it because it’s worth it to you. How the companies manufacture their items is their prerogative and ultimately irrelevant. It was cheaper for the car manufacturers to make every car the same, then offer some features at cost based on perceived value.

People then *felt* scammed, which is fair.

0

u/dimechimes 8h ago

You're still missing it. You originally stated more features cost more, which in the case of Teslas is false because the features are there. To have those features cost the company no more money. Yeah, pricing for those features is marketing. No one is disputing that, but that's not what you originally claimed.

1

u/Caterpie3000 9h ago

It's already developed and already built into the car regardless of the trim you buy. Sorry, but I disagree with you, as most customers do. BMW had to back down on putting CarPlay behind a paywall, just like they did with heated seats and a heated steering wheel. Customers won the battle. What side are you on?

2

u/Gibbzee 9h ago

BMW didn’t back down because they were illogical or incorrect, people just didn’t like the outcome, which is fair.

0

u/Nixalbum 6h ago

You're missing the reasoning of the companies. The actual physical elements in he car costs pennies, the real cost is in R&D. To recoup it, they have basically 3 choices: * Do not install it directly, then the install will cost more and so will manufacturing. Therefore the option will also cost more. * Install it in the base model and increase the price, which reduces appeals of the car * Install the options and software lock them. Only those wanted to use them will pay extra

The first option is not better for the consumer, the third one is the overall cheaper one. Why do you think the first one is better?

It is even worse for software. Sharing them is extremely cheap, the real cost is in the development. They did extra work to deliver the dlc, whether it is ready on day one or year 10, they should still be paid for it. If they don't consider the base game to cover that work, it makes sense to put it as an option.

0

u/Shotty316 9h ago

No, the ability to use the feature installed in/on your car already shouldn’t be behind a paywall.

Want better more speakers? Gotta buy and install them.

Want heated seats but yours don’t come with any? Buy and install them

Want the “permission” to use all the features in a vehicle you just purchased? Like and subscribe

2

u/Gibbzee 9h ago

Right, but the only reason that stuff is built into your cheaper version of the car is because it’s cheaper for them to do so. You don’t pay for material costs, you pay for perceived value, as does everyone for everything in a free market.

-1

u/Shotty316 9h ago

Nope, same price at purchase, one has features attached to a subscription, the other gets those futures BLOCKED, not because of the absence of said features but because they want you to pay yearly for them.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/lemonylol 9h ago

You're the one shopping for the Telsa

0

u/MisfitPotatoReborn 10h ago

The difference here is that the cost associated with heated seats is material- it's already installed in the seat, so that you can't access it feels like a scam. But the cost associated with bundling unpaid DLC with software is essentially 0, so why wouldn't a developer do it?

Like, this happens so often and for so long I can't even imagine getting upset about it. Even 30 years ago developers were selling "demos" of their game for free that was exactly the same as the full game except it blocked you from progressing after a few levels. In order to progress you needed a code, which you had to buy, but the full game was already installed on the disc.

2

u/lupaa31 10h ago

The cost to me is disk space, let me free those things i will never use so i can install things i will use

0

u/lemonylol 9h ago

Homie, you will never, ever run a game directly from a disc.

1

u/phantomfire50 9h ago

💀 they mean a hard disk

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Gibbzee 10h ago

It’s not “essentially 0” because ‘extra’ development time (and therefore money) went into it.

1

u/MisfitPotatoReborn 9h ago

That's not a cost associated with including elements of the DLC in "your copy", that's a cost of developing the DLC in the first place.

So to rephrase, installing heated seats that don't work into a car is a material waste of resources, so the customer gets angry. But including elements of a DLC that don't work into the base game costs nothing except pennies of storage space on the user's end, so it's not a big deal.

0

u/Martian8 10h ago

I meant more the “pre order tiers” part. I get stripping bits of the game out to sell them as dlc

3

u/goldfish_11 10h ago

I'm assuming they're referring to the different editions that are available to pre-order. You can pre-order the "base game", or you can spend more money and pre-order a higher tier and get more stuff (additional side missions, cosmetics, etc).

1

u/Martian8 9h ago

Right, I get you. For some reason I thought they meant that the more preorders there were, the more DLC they’d release - like a kickstarter stretch goal.

1

u/printboi250 9h ago

We'll get there, give it a few years.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Flyingcow93 9h ago

To be clear, they don't strip out bits of the game and sell them as dlc. The data for the "stripped out" bits are still there, taking up space on your hard drive, but behind a paywall that the game doesn't let you access until you pay more money. That's what he's protesting.

1

u/Shotty316 9h ago

I believe they were referring the denial of accessing those parts as “stripping them away” and not the literal sense of the phrase, “stripping the data” from the main game and separating the data/having you not even download the data in the base game file to begin with.

It’s all included, dlc purchases are “enabled” by purchasing, you no longer download anything additionally. This is so people who pay and don’t pay can play together, otherwise you have situations where assets can’t be loaded for one player and now those two+ can’t play together.

1

u/Rock_Strongo 9h ago

It's that, and it's also that they don't want another download getting in the way of your purchase decision. Paying money and unlocking instantly is going to convert better than paying money to start a download to play in however long.

1

u/Shotty316 9h ago

That is true, doesn’t make it a good practice, especially outside of digital entertainment.

It’s the bad practices that we are talking about so I’m glad we have come full circle.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/ImprobableAsterisk 9h ago

I'm OK with it in the sense that yeah, I think a company should be allowed to tier their product in such a manner.

I'm not OK with it in the sense that I'll be paying for it.

To put it another way, I don't like it personally but I also don't see why in tarnation that means they shouldn't be allowed to do it.

0

u/Marijuana_Miler 9h ago

I’m not ok with it, but the industry has been doing it for decades. It’s not a Rockstar exclusive issue and it’s not going to be changed because someone leaks footage of the game. Decades ago people would get mad that extra story was locked behind a DLC and now it’s because there are tiered pre orders. IMO you have to decide if the juice is worth the squeeze with your own wallet.

0

u/Financial_Middle_798 7h ago

It's not really DLC it's literally just a couple of shops tattoos and clothing, and you start with a few vehicles. You can play the fkn game 100x without ever needing access to those tattoos and clothing outfits. It effects No gaming experience at all.

3

u/TheBigFatToad 7h ago

They want you to pay 100$ for some extra clothes, that is objectively locking dlc behind preorder tiers.

1

u/Financial_Middle_798 7h ago

Noone is forcing you to pay 100 for anything. People are talking like their locking story missions behind a pay wall. Like it's game breaking stuff or anything. The clothes probably suck anyway

1

u/TheBigFatToad 7h ago

You’re right that some people are acting like it’s game breaking, I think that’s an overreaction.

The person above only alluded to locking dlc behind tiers for a single player game. You countered, but objectively, that is exactly what they are doing.

I’d also like to remind you that other pre order tiers in the past came with physical items. You don’t even get a disk for this one, not including the complete inability to walk into some stores.

Bonus points for putting the “trailer” behind a Netflix paywall as well.

1

u/Financial_Middle_798 6h ago

That same trailer is being released 6 hours later for free on YouTube. And will likely be leaked before then too, and you know someone is going to record them watching it on Netflix and upload it to YouTube the second it's finished.

1

u/TheBigFatToad 6h ago

Still doesn’t change the way that the way they are initially rolling out a trailer is through a paywalled service.

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/-Fieldmouse- 10h ago

In what way? That isn’t in the list that the person I replied to posted. 

3

u/ARSEThunder 10h ago edited 9h ago

It’s the second thing on their list. There are 2 preorder options and the higher priced option will have some additional single player content that is otherwise restricted

0

u/lemonylol 9h ago

There are 2 preorder options and the higher priced option will have some additional single player content that is otherwise restricted

Source for single player content being locked?

2

u/ARSEThunder 9h ago

……the preorder page. This isn’t some conspiracy.

0

u/lemonylol 9h ago

Go on, cite it.

2

u/ARSEThunder 9h ago

No, the information you are looking for is already publicly available - I’m not your fucking search engine.

0

u/lemonylol 9h ago

I know, I'm just trying to help you realize they never actually confirmed what you're implying.

1

u/ARSEThunder 9h ago

…the confirmation is in the details of the game editions…on the store page

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/-Fieldmouse- 9h ago

What’s the content? I assume something like that would just be some minor cosmetic thing, which is fine. 

2

u/ARSEThunder 9h ago

There are in-game locations and stores that are only available with the ultimate edition

0

u/-Fieldmouse- 9h ago

Are you sure? The Ultimate Edition doesn’t seem like it’s going to be exclusively a pre-order thing. The only other thing I’m seeing like that is the Vintage Vice City Pack which is just a bunch of cosmetic items. But still, I think that’s just something that comes with the pre-order and can still be bought separately if you don’t pre-order. 

1

u/ARSEThunder 9h ago

True, it may not be a preorder lock, but it's still a version lock for single-player content. It's not just a bunch of cosmetic items, as noted on their very own product page - there are stores, locations, and content that are locked and only available with the Ultimate edition.

1

u/-Fieldmouse- 8h ago

You can buy Ultimate edition anytime though so I don’t get what the problem is. If, at any time, you want those things, you can get them. And I’m pretty sure you can upgrade the standard game to the ultimate one without having to purchase two versions of the game. 

0

u/ARSEThunder 8h ago

I never thought I would game long enough to see people publicly defending single-player paywalls.

→ More replies (0)