Slashdot Mirror
Vice City To Xbox, Not GTA?
Thanks to IGN Xbox for their report that Grand Theft Auto:Vice City may be coming to Xbox this Christmas, but without the famed 'GTA' name. According to the piece: "As many insiders know, the Grand Theft Auto series is supposed to be PlayStation 2 console exclusive, however sources reveal that Rockstar is circumventing the agreement by stripping the Xbox version of the title Grand Theft Auto, and simply repackaging the game as Vice City." If true, this would mean that Rockstar wouldn't need to wait until after the next GTA game was released to lose Sony exclusivity, and could put out suitably renamed/rebranded GTA titles on other consoles sooner, rather than later - a fascinatingly sneaky concept.
Sounds like Microsoft-style contract agreement.
ohhhh, it's just good old sony style lawsuit.
now supporting:
cmdrTaco for president '04
michael for oval office intern summer '05
... you would expect from the designers of GTA! Where do you think they get their inspiration from? Way to go!
I can take the GNU/ off Linux and distribute it the way I want?
No, I'm not talking about the morality of Rockstar doing this, I'm pondering how the consumer is supposed to deal with it. It is just a game, but should I feel dirty buying a game that's been repackaged to escape a contract?
One thing I know about Sony--they're a big company, and thus have lots of lawyers. If Rockstar wants to wage a giant legal battle over the semantics of a contract, then I'd advise them to start of small and work up to multinational conglomerates.
I would imagine that the contract would be a little bit more concise than to just say "No games with the 'GTA' title can go to another platform". I'd expect all loose ends to be covered by Sony's legal department.
If not, then I'm going to rename my Radiohead mp3s as "Radiohat" -- then I won't have to worry about distributing Radiohead's material.
Damn M$ are getting more evil every day. Next they'll be wanting some control pads that don't cause gamers to develop biceps.
It occurred to me just the other day that EVERY GTA game is playable on the PS2. GTA was released for the PSX as was the add-on disc London 1969. Then GTA2 was also released on the PSX. (GTA2 also came out for the Dreamcast.)
Then along came GTA3 and GTA:VC, both for the PS2.
Except for GTA2 on the DC, no other console has had a GTA game. Not the N64 (duh). Not the Saturn. Looks like Sony's had a lock on this series for longer than I'd realized. Of course, there are the GameBoy Color versions, but those don't compete in the same market. And the mythical GTA3 for GBA still seems like vaporware.
The London 1969 add-on is cool, BTW. Plays better than the original GTA1, which is a bit choppy on the PSX. The prices on the PSX games are also way cheap nowadays. Is GTA2 worth playing?
Curmudgeon Gamer: Not happy
GTA is not PS2 exclusive exactly, there is just something like an 6 or 8 month waiting period before they are allowed to port it, at least that was my take on it. Vice City will be over a year old by the time it comes to x-box, most of it's revenue has already been made and if anything they will be selling it to many of the same people that already bought it since very few x-box owners don't have PS2s.
The name change trick is a clever idea, but it would never work if it went to court.
On Wall Street they say "buy low, sell high" On the pad we say, "buy high, sell high" Isn't that somehow better?
Some of you might remember this article... I personally commented that such a move like that may be for the company to gain support from the average consumer. So even though Joe Spender may have heard about these current events, they will remember that Rockstar is a "Gamer's gaming brand" and just overlook this "little bit" of bad business... Check M8?
Business \Busi"ness\, n.;
A scam in which all people involved perceive as beneficial...
Yeah, they're Rockstar, but how stupid is it to give Sony of all people the big double deuce? Bad Fscking Move. Because trust me, Rockstar, you will see the same people coming down that ladder that you saw on the way up.
I will admit that I have not looked into this past the blurb (so apologies in advance if a closer look would have revealed all this to be bogus), but if it's true this strikes me as very, very poor form. You got there, in part, with Sonys help. Incredible games, but I really hope their lawyers cram it up your ass.
My
Limekiller
Which is more scary to take on Microsoft or Sony?
Im sure Sony will immediately seek some remedies if RockStar moves forward on this. Why pay them millions for exclusivity only to be sidestepped on semantics.
If I were on a jury I definitely would strike against Rockstar.
That Microsoft was also planning to use this sort of loophole to circumvent the DOJ anti-trust issues around Windows by simply repackaging it with a new name.
Anyone hear similar rumors?
A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
... Unless you know other hands willing to feed you.
If it's true, it's a bad move for R*. The GTA series sells millions, have Sony's backing and access to a huge console user-base. If they think they have the upper hand here. Worst that could happen is Sony banning them from releasing anything on their console. From a 50 million+ user base to just a little over 10 million.
Of course, they can still please Sony by simultaneously releasing Vice City on the Xbox and GTA4 on the PS2, but I doubt MS would be happy about that. Either way they are in dangerous waters now and should really thread carefully.
...selling a new game to Xbox as well, named III.
Pulp Audio Weekly - Geek News and Reviews
all the GTA games are also on PC with the exception of a couple of expansions and there was the crappy gameboy port.
Assuming this is true, I'm sure Sony would make Rockstar eat this one hard. I have 0 evidence to support this, but I think it's pretty safe to assume that, especially after the success of GTA 3, Sony must have thown enough very heavy bags of money at Rockstar to make them keep VC (And probably GTA3) a PS2 exclusive (as far as consoles go), if not forever, for at least a good few years. Rockstar doing this would probably get them the support of X-Box fans, but I honestly wouldn't be surprised if Sony blocked Rockstar titles in the future as a form of punishment. And there are a lot more people with PS2's then X-Boxs (Though this may have something to do with PS2 failure rates inflating sales numbers, but that's another post) so a Sony block would hurt Rockstar in the long run.
Besides, I'm sure a healthy number of people with X-Boxs probably have PCs, and those that would buy VC probably already bought it when it came to PC, so I really think any customer gain would be slim, mostly limted to X-Boxers without PCs capable of running VC. I'm not saying it wouldn't still sell well, but it probably wouldn't be worth: 1) Alienating Sony for the rest of time, 2) The loss of whatever "retention" bonus I'm sure Sony would violently take back out of Rockstar's ass, and 3) Any costs associated with said violent anal raping of Rockstar by Sony, i.e. Court Fees. So, again, assuming this is true, it would be a very bad case of near sightedness on the part of Rockstar.
And as for the validility of this story, why the hell would Rockstar risk fucking up like this a year or less before their Sony exclusive deal is supposidly going to expire? Odd both these come from the same source.
Request: ECM unit, 1000 km fullerene cable, 1 tactical nuclear weapon. Reason: Birthday party for foreign dignitary.
Doinign criminal games, working in a criminal way, AND I LUV IT.....
The lunatic is in my head
...is to name the game Grand Theft Auto: Vice City Simulator. That way, you aren't playing GTA: Vice City on your XBox, your are merely simulating playing it. They could have the game start with the Playstation 2 logo, or if they wanted to say it was a simulation of the PC version it could just have a really low framerate, lowres textures and crash all the time.
Things like this are why license agreements are twenty pages long and take a team of lawyers to decipher. Grrrrr
The game formelly known as Vice City?
I think Rockstar are making a huge mistake if they go ahead with this. I seriously don't think they've thought it through. At the very least, Sony will sue them to hell, worst case sceanrio is that Sony block them from producing PS2 games. Turning your back on a multi-million selling platform to the console that is mecca for piracy is a bad mistake. Any idiot with a soldering iron can chip an X-Box (hell, I know, I chipped mine). The PS2 on the other hand is a lot more complicated. The majority of people I know with an X-Box have them chipped and rarely buy legit games. So to lose all those PS2 games sales just so you can produce for a console where the majority of owners will just rip off your game anyway would be like shooting yourself in the foot. I hope Sony persue this, it's a shady way to do business, I'm pretty sure Sony were paying bucket loads of cash for more than just the GTA name. In fact, I hope Rockstar get sued out of existence and Sony get ownership of the GTA brand. At least it will make a point that shady business practices will get you burned.
"Dre don't get as high as me.... I'm Cheech and Chong" - Snoop Dogg
Most likely what would happen is that Sony would sue Rockstar's ass to hell and back for this very stupid move, and then buy the company up and make all Rockstar games Playstation Only.
Sony will not just sit back and let their #1 title go over to another console. And if this is ture, watch Vice City not come out for Xbox and Sony announce the buy out of Rockstar.
-------- -Cap
~Bommers, Why did it have to be Bommers!?!
If not, then I'm going to rename my Radiohead mp3s as "Radiohat" -- then I won't have to worry about distributing Radiohead's material.
Not quite...the difference in this case is that Rockstar owns the copyright to the game...not Sony. Rockstar just signed an agreement to only release for the Sony system not to give Sony the claim to Rockstar's stuff. Rockstar could change it to whatever the hell they want...it's just a legal grey area whether they are breaching their contract with Sony.
oooh whee. as if this really make a frikkin' difference. how many more copies can they sell on the Xbox that they haven't sold to people that have a PS2?!
what percentage of the market has ONLY the Xbox console?! and SOO crazy for it that they could not even stand renting a PS2 to play a game?!
if there are such people. i feel sorry for them.
I expect they probably get it from Tecmo who promised that DOA 2 would only be on the DC, and then realeased a game called, "DOA 2: Hardcore" on the Playstation 2 months later. This stuff is way common.
Netjak.com independent reviews of domestic & import video ga
Sony, OTOH, is a BIG company. They have the giant electronics division, Sony Pictures, Sony Music, Sony Entertainment, Sony kitchen sinks, etc.
In Q1 of 2003 (source: SmartMoney.com financials), Sony had revenues of $13.7 Billion. Microsoft had revenues of $7.8 Billion. Sony is so large and so diversified, wheras Microsoft is in one (admittedly large) industry. It wouldn't be two 800-pound gorillas, it would be one 800-pounder and one one-tonner.
Either way, I wouldn't want to be Rockstar.
-T