760°

Rockstar Have Finally Traded-In Their Reputation For Money

Andrew says: "This is the stark contrast between their last two decades of work. The first decade was about building a foundation, forging a legacy. The last nine years have obviously seen a humongous drop-off in terms of output, and shifted their philosophy towards “quality over quantity."

Read Full Story >>
keengamer.com
Skuletor1823d ago

No, they already did that years ago

littletad1823d ago

Now we know why one of the founders left. Perhaps he didn't like the direction anymore.

b163o11823d ago (Edited 1823d ago )

I feel as if Ol'Dan (Houser) is going to start his own company. Perhaps he'll link back up with Leslie Benzies, and make a better game...

roadkillers1822d ago

Isn't it funny how the media makes their own stories why people leave. Everybody wants to create a story... how is the media and people making stuff up in the comments is any different from what Rockstar is doing?

Lon3wolf1823d ago

Was going to say the same thing, as soon as they abandoned any SP DLC for GTA is when I reckon it started.

Godmars2901823d ago

Yeah, was thinking that was *AGES* ago.

1823d ago
dumahim1822d ago

Funny thing is, the money they're making is what affords them to take forever to make the games they do to the level that few could possibly match.

Pyrofire951822d ago

Well yeah. That's what the article ends up being about. Bad name for the article tbh.

shuvam091822d ago

Several years between games, and none too likeable at that...

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1822d ago
FallenAngel19841823d ago

A whole generation going by and them releasing only one new game for the entirety of it while all their other IPs go dormant didn’t clue you in?

Where have you been since 2014?

FITSniper1823d ago

Same can be said of CDPR. While they released Gwent and the Tales game, those weren't anywhere near a massive effort that Witcher 3 was. Now yes, Rockstar though has seemed focus heavily on the MP component of their games which has driven crazy revenue to them. Not that that's a bad thing. More power to them. I just ask they keep the SP experiences coming to. It's easy to see why RDR2 took so long. The game was utterly massive.

Vegamyster1823d ago

CDPR will have Cyberpunk 2077 out this year, that’s two massive games this gen, two large DLC expansions plus a bunch of smaller games, they’re in no way comparable lol.

Movefasta19931823d ago

Those two dlc individually have more depth and longevity then a lot of games.

1823d ago
JEECE1822d ago

It's cool to hate on Rockstar now, so people don't want to admit that a lot of major studios have significantly slowed down in terms of output this gen. Sony Santa Monica only put out one game this gen, and they get praised for it. Guerrilla only made two, and one was a launch game. If you don't count remasters of last gen games, Naughty Dog will only have two games, even though they had four last gen.

Also, people will get mad and blast you if you put out too many games. So really there's no way to win. If gamers decide you are a bad evil company, you are going to get attacked regardless of the quality of your games.

SamPao1822d ago

@JEECE well. ND actually made 3, you know, lost legacy. I mean it takes as long to beat that game as the old uncharted games. So yeah its not really a way to measure things.
Because games got longer. I mean god of war is like 3 times longer than any old god of war no?

JEECE1822d ago

@SamPao

It seems like a reach to count Lost Legacy as a full game. However, putting that aside, it seems like from your comments on God of War, you actually agree with my point. My point was that as games have become bigger and more detailed, it is natural for studios to slow down on the number of releases per generation. My point is that people won't apply the arguments they use against Rockstar to other devs who have slowed down new releases just as much as they have.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1822d ago
FallenAngel19841822d ago

@ Fit

Are you really comparing CDPR to a behemoth like Rockstar?

@ Jeece

Are you really comparing the output of developers to an entire publisher?

Nobody criticizes any publisher for releasing a lot of games, so there’s no damage controlling this.

JEECE1822d ago (Edited 1822d ago )

I'm not comparing to all of Take-Two, no. And there have been plenty of other Take-Two releases this gen.

"Nobody criticizes any publisher for releasing a lot of games."

This might be my favorite thing I've ever seen on this site. People frequently criticize publishers for releasing too many games.

FallenAngel19841822d ago

I’m not referring to Take-Two as a whole, just Rockstar

I’ve yet to see people complaining about a publisher releasing a ton of games. Even if that hypothetically was an actual thing that still wouldn’t be a problem

goldwyncq1822d ago

That one game took over 8 years to develop and is among the best games ever created.

Tyler Durden1822d ago (Edited 1822d ago )

@ goldwyncq Its really not. Besides the feel of the world and the look of it, theres really nothing all that ground breaking. In fact, most people dont even finish it because its so tedious and boring.

goldwyncq1822d ago

The quality of the writing, the AI, and the unprecedented level of world interactivity and immersion makes it one of the best games ever created and its 97 Metacritic score is easily proof of that.

Just because it doesn't cater to the Fortnite/COD crowd who prefers nonstop action over slow-burn character development doesn't mean it's not a great game.

Tyler Durden1822d ago (Edited 1822d ago )

I already conceded that the world design is groundbreaking. But the writing is abysmal. The characters are not very interesting at all and the story is all over the place. I dont think ive ever meet someone who played GTA 5 for the story. Metacritic score means bery little in this day and age with the state of gsming journalism. I would argue that GTA 5 is actually caters MORE to the COD and Fortnite crowd and thats why its become shallow.

JEECE1822d ago

If someone can't acknowledge this, there is almost no point in having a discussion with them. The amount that gamers take for granted is truly staggering. Rockstar is one of those devs that people now take for granted because of their own enormous achievements (Bethesda Game Studios being another). People don't compare them against any other studio actually in existence, but rather against an ideal scenario in their head of a studio that puts an RDR2-quality game out every 2-3 years, which is not a thing that exists.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1822d ago
BigBosss1823d ago

Greed has poisoned mens soul -Charlie Chaplin

V3geta1823d ago

No one gets into business for any other reason than making money.

Ristul1822d ago (Edited 1822d ago )

Some people invest time and money in companies in order to do what they love, making money is just a means to an end - so that they can keep doing what their passionate about.

Then there are those that invest their time and money with only the drive to make more money.

1822d ago
KingofGambling1821d ago

Marriage is fine as an institution, but bad as a habit - Buster Keaton.
I know its got nothing do with the article. It's just I saw you quoted a comedy legend, so I quoted one too.

1823d ago Replies(1)
ClayRules20121823d ago

Years ago, Rockstar did this. It’s a darn shame too.

I mean, as much as I personally loved GTA5’s campaign & Multiplayer as an overall package, and thought they delivered a very good multiplayer mode, I wanted some SP DLC, which would’ve made them plenty of millions alone in that itself. No doubt gamers would’ve bought, as I’ve seen from so many who’ve expressed disappointment from it not having happened. But what can you do? Rockstar see many are just buying to darn “Shark cards” and the company’s made so much money its absolutely sickening.

Now, looking at Rockstar’s quality of games, I do believe they’re still at the top tier in the industry, no doubt about it. Their production values, work, story, and gameplay (yes I said gameplay) for me was very good/solid in RDR2. I loved the realistic approach and slowness of everything pretty much in the game, although I know many didn’t, which I do understand and that’s fair. But its a shame their focus on GTA5’s online has driven them to shift focus to not online putting so much focus on that which takes away from their other IPs like Max Payne, Bully, Manhunt and so on, but only getting one game per the last 2 generations from them.

I sure do hope the PS5 will be a real change for Rockstar to bring out more than one game (not remastered GTA5 for PS5/Xbox series X) but multiple IPs this console generation. I won’t hold my breath tho.

rpvenom1823d ago

I think what we need.. is a GTAO killer or next GTA clone that surpasses GTA.. I know it's unlikely but hopefully someone new can step in the ring and dethrone them to make them want to release good games again.

ClayRules20121823d ago

Yeah, that’d be nice. I’d be all for that. Some company that’d bring real competition to Rockstar’s GTA. Because we all know “Watch Dog”s didn’t do that lol. But I’m anxious to see how that WD’s legion turns out.

Kabaneri1823d ago

Maybe if Saints Row went back to its roots.

GameZenith1823d ago

I think the Cyberpunk 2077 online component will be big. Also Cyberpunk 2077 while not get the same amount of sales as GTA, will certainly out do RDR2 and many people will start proclaiming CDPR as the new king of the open world experience. Again, not taking damage to Rockstar sales but they will feel it with their reputation.

This along with the inevitable Witcher 4 coming off of the success or CP2077 will be enough to light a fire under Rockstar.

Show all comments (87)
80°

Inside the ‘Dragon Age’ Debacle That Gutted EA’s BioWare Studio

The latest game in BioWare’s fantasy role-playing series went through ten years of development turmoil

In early November, on the eve of the crucial holiday shopping season, staffers at the video-game studio BioWare were feeling optimistic. After an excruciating development cycle, they had finally released their latest game, Dragon Age: The Veilguard, and the early reception was largely positive. The role-playing game was topping sales charts on Steam, and solid, if not spectacular, reviews were rolling in.

HyperMoused23h ago

Its easy they called the die hard fans people in their nerd caves who will buy anything and then went woke to reach modern audiences....insulting the nerds in their caves along the way showing utter contempt for their fan base. very hapy it failed and any company who insults their fan base and treat their customers with contempt and insults, in future, i also hope fail.

neutralgamer199219h ago

It’s disappointing but not surprising to see what's happening with Dragon Age: The Veilguard and the broader situation at BioWare. The layoffs are tragic — no one wants to see talented developers lose their jobs. But when studios repeatedly create games that alienate their own fanbase, outcomes like this become unfortunately predictable.

There’s a pattern we’re seeing far too often: beloved franchises are revived, only to be reshaped into something almost unrecognizable. Changes are made that no one asked for, often at the expense of what originally made these games special. Then, when long-time fans express concern or lose interest, they’re told, “This game might not be for you.” But when those same fans heed that advice and don’t buy the game, suddenly they're labeled as toxic, sexist, bigoted, or worse.

Let’s be clear: the overwhelming majority of gamers have no issue with diversity, LGBTQ+ representation, or strong female leads. In fact, some of the most iconic characters in gaming — like Aloy, Ellie, or FemShep — are proof that inclusivity and excellent storytelling can and do go hand in hand. The issue arises when diversity feels performative, forced, or disconnected from the narrative — when characters or themes are inserted not to serve the story, but to satisfy a corporate DEI checklist. Audiences can tell the difference.

When studios chase approval from a vocal minority that often doesn’t even buy games — while simultaneously dismissing loyal fans who actually do — they risk not just the success of individual titles, but the health of their entire studio. Telling your core customers “don’t buy it if you don’t like it” is not a viable business strategy. Because guess what? Many of us won’t. And when the game fails commercially, blaming those very fans for not supporting it is both unfair and self-defeating.

Gamers aren’t asking for less diversity or less progress. We’re asking for better writing, thoughtful character development, and a respect for the franchises we’ve supported for decades. When you give people great games that speak to them — whether they’re old fans or new players — they will show up. But if you keep making games for people who don’t play them, don’t be surprised when those who do stop showing up

Armaggedon13h ago

I thought the writing and character development were fine. Sometimes things just dont resonate with people.

90°

Report: Just Cause 5 Was in Development at Sumo Digital, But Got Cancelled

Recent evidence we discovered indicates that the next game in the Just Cause series may have been canceled, potentially two years ago.

RaidenBlack2d ago

NOooooooooooooooooooooo....... ..............

mkis0071d 23h ago

Well if it went back to being more like 3 I would have liked it. 4 was crap.

280°

Bend Studio Reportedly Lays Off 30 Percent of Staff Following Live-Service Project Cancellation

Sony's Bend Studio lays off 30 percent of its workforce following the cancellation of its live-service project.

Read Full Story >>
twistedvoxel.com
Jin_Sakai3d ago

And to think we could’ve been playing Days Gone 2 by now.

RaidenBlack2d ago

I would even pay 80 bucks for an UE5 based more immersive Days Gone 2 .... or even a new Syphon Filter.
But nah .... rather lay off staff & re-remasters Days Gone i.e Days Gone Reloaded.

Cacabunga2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

Stubborn Sony not wanting to listen to fans is paying the price of its arrogance. They could have let these studios grow and do what they do best and let others like Bungie maybe make gaas for those who want it.

Days Gone 2 is obviously what they should focus on next. We’ve had enough remasters and reeditions of the first one

Profchaos2d ago

Sony's not paying the price its workers are.

z2g2d ago

They were listening to the money that games like Fortnite were pulling in. Market research shows service games when successful make more money. It’s a gamble that Sony was too cocky to worry about. Now ppl are losing their jobs in an economy that’s gonna slow down any minute.

gerbintosh1d 19h ago

@Profchaos

The workers let go were probably hired for the live service game and released now because it was cancelled

jznrpg2d ago

People needed to buy the first game! And not at 20$

neutralgamer19922d ago

I understand the argument that if fans truly wanted a sequel to Days Gone, they should've supported it at launch at full price. But that perspective misses a lot of important context.

First of all, Days Gone launched in a broken state. It needed several patches just to become stable and playable. For many gamers, paying $60 for something clearly unfinished just wasn’t justifiable. That wasn’t a lack of support—it was a fair response to a product that didn’t meet expectations out of the gate.

Despite that, over 8 million people eventually bought the game. It built a strong, passionate fanbase—proof that the game had value and potential once it was properly patched. A sequel would’ve had a much stronger foundation: a team that had learned from the first game, a loyal audience, and way more hype around a continued story.

But Days Gone also had to contend with another challenge—it was unfairly judged against other first-party PlayStation exclusives. Critics compared it directly to polished, masterful experiences like Uncharted, The Last of Us, and God of War. And while those comparisons might make sense from a branding perspective, they didn’t reflect the reality of the situation.

Studios like Naughty Dog and Santa Monica Studio had years—sometimes decades—of experience working with big teams and high budgets on flagship titles. Days Gone was Sony Bend Studio’s first major AAA console release in a very long time—their last being Syphon Filter back in the PS1 era. Before that, they were mostly focused on handheld games. Expecting them to match the output of the most elite studios in the industry, right out of the gate, was unrealistic and frankly unfair.

The harsh critical reception didn’t reflect the potential Days Gone actually had, and it probably played a big role in Sony's decision not to greenlight a sequel. Instead, they pushed Bend and other talented studios like Bluepoint toward live service projects—chasing trends instead of trusting the kinds of games their fans consistently show up for. Many of those live service games have since been canceled, likely wasting hundreds of millions of dollars and valuable time that could’ve gone toward meaningful single-player experiences.

So when people say, “You should’ve bought Days Gone at launch if you wanted a sequel,” they’re ignoring the bigger picture. Gamers didn’t reject the game—they waited for it to be worth their time. And once it was, they absolutely showed up. That should’ve been seen as a foundation to build on, not a reason to walk away from the franchise

InUrFoxHole1d 17h ago

@neutralgamer1992
Has a point. I supported this game day 1. There was either and audio sync issue or a cut scene issue that ruined the game for me early on. I dont blame gamers at all for holding off until it meets their standard.

raWfodog2d ago

I seriously wonder who makes these types of decisions. Days Gone was a solid game. It didn't get that much love at first but people eventually saw the diamond in the rough. The ending basically guaranteed a sequel, but someone said "nope, let's pitch a LS game instead". And the yes-men were all "Great idea, sir!!"

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1d 17h ago
-Foxtrot3d ago

Urgh. Jim Ryan’s sh***y GaaS plans still ripple across their studios even today.

Such a shame, they should have just been allowed to make Days Gone 2.

Sony need to truly let go of their live service plans once and for all.

OMNlPOTENT2d ago

Agreed. I think the live service era is dead. Even titans like Destiny are starting to fall apart. Sony needs to shift their focus back to their single player games.

ABizzel12d ago (Edited 2d ago )

I don’t think the GaaS overall was a bad idea they’ve seen the success of others, however, forcing all your studios to focus on it was absolutely insane.

Those kind of games are backed by hundreds if not thousands over 1,000 developers working on those games year-round even after release for continuous new content monthly, quarterly, and huge annual or bi-annual updates. It was stupid to expect taking your single-player focused studios and have them become GaaS focused studios when many of them have skipped Multi-player modes the entire last generation (a stepping stone into GaaS).

He was after his Fortnite, Apex, etc… and I feel they could have found that by building a singular new studio dedicated to helping developers like Naughty Dog bring Faction 2.0 to life. At most they should have had:

Factions 2.0 GaaS (PlayStation’s Open World Survival)
Destiny 3 (Bungie needs to revamp Destiny)
Horizon GaaS (PlayStation’s Monster Hunter)
A new AAA IP

That’s it. I mean technically Gran Turismo is a GaaS so that could count, and an Open World InFamous meets DC Universe Online could work with custom hero / villain classes.

raWfodog2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

"I don’t think the GaaS overall was a bad idea they’ve seen the success of others, however, forcing all your studios to focus on it was absolutely insane."

What's more interesting is that SIE was not actually 'forcing' their studios to make GaaS games. I have to find the article again but it was explained that these studios knew about Jim's plans for GaaS games and typically pitched those types of games to SIE because they would have a better chance of getting greenlit for production. They were chasing dollars instead of their ideal games.

Edit: I found the article. Take it for what it is, lol

https://wccftech.com/playst...

ABizzel11d 6h ago (Edited 1d 6h ago )

@ra

I don’t think they were forcing all of their studios, however, that initiative didn’t just come out of no where. Jim Ryan’s entire purpose was to make PlayStation more profitable than ever, and a collection of successful GaaS across platforms would have definitely done that. Based on his talk tracks and interviews he is a numbers guy, and he and Herman Hulst ran with this GaaS solution to all the PlayStation teams.

And when your CEO says this is what we’re getting behind and what the company and shareholders want going forward, everyone falls in line and pushes towards it.

Naughty Dog probably wanted Faction 2 with or without influence.

Sony Bend wanted Days Gone 2 and it was shot down, and now more than ever it makes way more sense, since the game, while initial impressions were slightly above average (which at the time wasn’t good enough being compared to God of War, Ghost, TLoUs, etc…), has found a cult following and has ended up selling extremely well across both PS4 and PS5. But instead they were dropped into this GaaS IP that failed and now they’ve wasted years of development when Days Gone 2 could have already been released or releasing.

3d ago
Obscure_Observer2d ago

Sony literally sent Playstation studios into a death trap!

They forced studios into this GaaS bs just cancel their games midway in development and fire thousand of people in the end!

WTF is happening over there? Why those CEOs still got to keep their jobs after billions and billions dollars invested in new studios and games just to so many developers fired and projects canceled in the end?

This is the worst generation of Playstation! Period!

CrimsonWing692d ago

Jim Ryan got fir—err I mean, retired.

anast2d ago

Jimmy followed Phil's advice.

2d ago
raWfodog2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

They didn't actually 'force' their studios, per se, but the initiative was certainly there.

https://wccftech.com/playst...

-Foxtrot2d ago

They didn't have a choice lets be honest, a new boss comes in and lays out all these plans....what are any of them going to do? Pitch a single player game with none of the things that guy is asking for? You're just asking to be given less funding, less notice, less resources and the like. or maybe you're scared incase the guy decides to get rid of you for someone who will actually give him things that he wants.

They didn't get brutally forced but they had no choice but to go with the flow or Jim would find someone who would.

raWfodog1d 20h ago (Edited 1d 20h ago )

@Foxtrot
No, they definitely had a choice but many chose the path of least resistance.

We have plenty of single-player, non-LS games that began development during the LS initiative. Those projects obviously got greenlit for production. These studios just needed to have good ideas for single player games, but most just chose to come up with half-assed LS pitches.

slate912d ago

Can't believe Sony has been shooting themselves in the foot this gen. Abandoning what made them great to chase industry trends

Skyfly472d ago (Edited 2d ago )

Alanah explains the reasons why in this video which goes into more detail: https://www.youtube.com/wat... But its basically down to appeasing their shareholders

Show all comments (44)