Grand Theft Auto VI, the next mainline installment of Rockstar Games’ best-selling action-adventure franchise, will feature a map that is at least twice as big as the one featured in GTA V, its 2013 predecessor, according to updates from the GTA VI – Vice City & Leonida State Mapping Project, a project that is attempting to recreate the sixth game’s map based on much of the information that has been uncovered for the anticipated title thus far ahead of its release on PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X|S consoles in 2025. The update comes on the heels of a new SEC filing that can confirm GTA publisher Take-Two is not only canceling $140 million in new projects, but also laying off hundreds of workers.
A look at how the maps might compare:
Take-Two mentioned in its SEC filing:
- “…the Company is rationalizing its pipeline and eliminating several projects in development and streamlining its organizational structure, which will eliminate headcount and reduce future hiring needs.”
- “The total charge consists of approximately $120 million to $140 million related to title cancellations, approximately $25 million to $35 million associated with employee severance and employee-related costs, and approximately $15 million to $25 million related to office space reductions.”
- “The Plan is expected to be largely complete by December 31, 2024 and will reduce the Company’s workforce by approximately 5%.”
Take-Two on why GTA VI is expected to be a big seller:
With each successive blockbuster entry in the series including Grand Theft: Vice City, Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, and Grand Theft Auto IV, Grand Theft Auto has become one of the biggest selling, most critically acclaimed and influential properties in all of modern entertainment. The most recent iteration in the series, Grand Theft Auto V, has sold over 190 million units to date. Rockstar Games’ blockbuster western series, Red Dead Redemption has sold over 81 million units worldwide to date, with its most recent release, Red Dead Redemption 2, breaking new ground in fidelity and immersion.
Discussion (19 replies)
Join Discussion →Still going with the console exclusivity route? Fools. It's no longer 2013.
This is especially weird considering all they care about it pleasing investors, hence the layoffs, (it's not like they can't afford the overhead). Yet they want to cut off a large segment of the market.
I agree. The PC modding community and RP are what's keeping GTAV alive for so long. To release it for console only is crazy.
It’s so they can have a big second release.
It’ll come out for Pc - this is all part of the sales strategy.
Yes, that was 2013. Now everything is about and for the investor. Produce ROI asap, get rich quick schemes, not a penny wasted etc. The games industry practice of firing everyone and re-hiring them 6 months later is the most disgusting practice ever normalized by stakeholder capitalism.
Agreed on all and its a given they'll invest in AI to replace more humans in an overall attempt to further cut costs down the road. I admit I had some fun with GTA V but there's little or no chance I'll be buying whenever it actually does make it to PC. Between GTA V, CP2077, and RDR2, I've had my fill of gangsta gaming.
I was hoping that AI would be used to improve games, but naah, let's just use it to replace creatives.
I really didn't like GTA V that much, it was a one and done game for me, meaning finished the story once then barely touched it after that. I played a ton with every GTA between 3 and IV, which sounds weird but that is actually four and a half games: GTA3, Vice City, San Andreas, GTAIV, and Episodes from liberty city.
I'm undecided on GTAVI, I might check it out if it manages to avoid the DEI treatment, but even then only on PC.
I spent most of my time with V using it more like a driving sim. Totally enjoyed putting on those cheesy 80s tunes and cruising sun up to sun down. Sad I know.
In my younger and single days I spent time hanging out at friends houses watching them play III/IV and I even remember watching the 1st one and laughing because at the time I thought Driver was so much better.
Forgot to add that after owning V for around 3-4 years I finally put some effort into the campaign and got about 30-40% but was bored even though I did like the visuals.
Even Sony seems to finally be figuring out how foolish console exclusivity is: https://www.thefpsreview.com/2024/03/11/ex-playstation-boss-on-200-million-games-exclusivity-is-your-achilles-heel/
Sadly yeah even @MadMummy76 mentioned that in the thread for the article I posted above:
And to that I say fine, whatever, but those later releases need to be significantly cheaper. Don't bring a 3-year-old (or older) console game to PC and then have the nerve to charge full price for it, when the same game could be had on console for 50%+ lower price thanks to sales due to the game's age. We live in a time where games go on sale for 50% off during the same year they come out, and 1-2 years later could be found on sale for $5. So get the f*ck outta here with that $60-$70 port to PC bullsh1t. That's when people start "borrowing" games from the "community library".
About 90% of the appeal of GTA is in the driving for me. For stupid action games they always had decent physics (even the 2D ones). Not sims by any measure, but the cars drove like you expected them. Unlike arcade racing games of the time where the cars moved completely arbitrarily, for example burnout, or some of the later NFS games. I despised those with every fiber of my being. I'd rather cruise along aimlessly in the current GTA iteration than play any of those horrible driving games. But by the time I got GTAV on PC there were other better options for just using as cruising sims.
I liked both the Driver series and GTA, it was not a rivalry to me. I loved driving up and down in Driver3, and even in Parallel lines where they stupidly tried to mimic GTA by adding out of car gameplay.
There is 1 benefit of waiting for games to come from console.
Little chance there will be a year + of patches adding features and QOL fixes.
You mean like Horizon Zero Dawn?
I think in this respect ports are worse, as they are tailored to the console so they miss sometimes even the most common QOL features that are taken for granted on PC. And the features that are added might be tacked on with little care.
Making ports and remasters is probably the lowest rung of game development often handled by the lesser studios who couldn't make a stand alone game.
Anyone else just not care about GTA VI?
Especially since it's console only...
I've never played any of them so maybe that's why.
Can definitely be a plus and usually we get the complete edition, or at least all that's been released up to that point.
I think it depends. Nixxes has had its growing pains but honestly but I feel is no worse than any PC only, or at least games made to take advantage of PC, developers given the number of those that were train wrecks at launch such as Batman Arkham Knight, Mass Effect Andromeda, Metro Exodus, CP2077, Cities Skylines, and more I can't remember or don't play. Nixxes is as least putting more effort into multi-threaded support, direct storage, DLAA, XeSS, FSR, shader caching, and ultra-wide monitor suppport. It'd be nice if RT was there too but they are covering most of the PC bases. I do agree that some texture upgrades would be nice but I've seen worse.
I hear you and have seen or read about a lot of junk but for me Spider-Man (I know CPU-wise it was rough) was decent at launch, and same with God of War and Horizon Forbidden West. I know that HZD was also rough on CPUs at launch as well but I didn't get it until about a year later. Now in the PC community there are so many other factors with each person's build and so on but they both mostly just worked and were optimized as time went on. No different than any other PC game I've bought in the last 10+ years.
I do agree that some ports do essentially have a garbage in/garbage out approach in not taking advantage of PC feature but that isn't always the case. I don't remember if I got GTA V at launch, just that it took at least a year after release for me to even try playing it. RDR2 however I got at launch and still waited almost two years for them to optimize it plus they packed so much visual IQ settings into it that it took that long and more just for my hardware purchases to catch up to take advantage of and honestly couldn't play with max settings at 4K/60+ FPS until I had a 3090 Ti and even then it took them adding DLSS to do so.
However, I agree even more with the idea that Rockstar, and others, are mainly only interested in the double, triple, or more, dip for longterm profits. Also, the sad truth is that a lot of games don't launch on PC in perfect, or even great shape but I don't attribute that to ports only. From mircostutters to GPU specific driver issues, and even some CPU-specific items, there's plenty of non-ported games that need help after launch. It doesn't help that every time we turn around someone is adding a new feature which is great for advancing technology but puts a greater burden on developers to catch up to. I imagine after a bit they end up feeling like Jackie Chan.
Maybe this is unpopular but I'd rather have a fully featured game like CP2077 that launches with bugs than a port that is missing features and designed for console hardware but is relatively bug free. Bugs can be fixed, a mediocre game will remain mediocre always.