Here's why Take-Two doesn't release new Borderlands, GTA games every year

By Shawn Knight · 11 replies
Nov 20, 2015
Post New Reply
  1. Take-Two Interactive, the publisher, developer and distributor behind several high-profile video game franchises, doesn’t really fit the mold some of its competitors adhere to.

    Rather than release a new game in a particular series every year (like Activision does with Call of Duty or Ubisoft with Assassin’s Creed, for example), Take-Two and its subsidiaries often spend several years developing franchise titles (excluding sports games, of course, as those are updated yearly to reflect roster changes). If you’ve ever wondered why that is, today’s your lucky day.

    During a chat at the MKM Partners Investor Day in New York City, Take-Two CEO Strauss Zelnick said his company is better served to create anticipation and demand, adding that annual releases can burn off intellectual property and that they’d rather have their game launches be considered massive consumer events.

    In other words, Take-Two prefers to focus on quality over quantity and doesn’t want to introduce franchise fatigue – something that Call of Duty may be suffering from. For example, Grand Theft Auto V arrived more than five years after its predecessor. Imagine how much content, scale and attention to detail would have been lost had they pumped the game out in just a year or two.

    Do you agree with this strategy (quality over quantity) or would you rather see Take-Two drop new entries in their hit franchises every year or so? Let us know in the comments section below!

    Permalink to story.

  2. 3volv3d

    3volv3d TS Addict Posts: 155   +59

    I do agree in theory with their idea. Sports games, updated every year, pointless most the time. They have a game thats good, sell a cheap rosta update DLC... why not ? It is easy money for them really, and half the time they balls up the new version. They may as well update every 2 or 3 years to make some real improvements.

    Saying that, GTA5 Online , in my opinion has so many issues its ludicrous. Single player was gorgeous as far as Sandboxes go. Every house and building different. They had only 5 models for the buildings until the boss guy said, no, no no no, make 3000 models... by tea time.

    But online. Feels like its been left to the hackers and modders. There are plenty of jobs and heists, and they are good, but otherwise, in free for all, it is griefer city. I feel like the world needs Gangs /factions, that do jobs, for money, unlocks whatever. But if you aren't doing a job, you are just a target for someone who can explode every player on the map with his undetectable "paid for" menu. And they should lose the whole "loading into an apartment" for the heists, it makes it so slow at times. You can have someone get stuck in loading screens and you have to quit out the game.

    So as much as producing god awful crap like COD games, that are as samey as FIFA and NHL games are, saying that they produced quality...with gta5... its pretty, its just also pretty S***.
  3. alabama man

    alabama man TS Maniac Posts: 377   +241

    Haven't bought cod after cod 2, or assasin's creed after ac2. Haven't bought any sports games after 90's either. Same game, better graphics, don't really care for that. Also cod is like 200$ if you want full game with all dlc so too pricey for something you're supposed to buy every year. If cod came every five years would buy, looks like fun. Same for sports games. Assassin’s Creed wouldn't interest me even with 5 year cycle with it's semi scifi plot and immersion breaking ui messages.

    Borderlands stopped being one of my favorite series after bl2 season pass that didn't have all content and divided our group to those who bought on release with season pass and those who bought goty on sale (and got more that those who supported early). For all upcoming borderland games I wait for full game with all dlc before buying. No idea in paying more for less.
  4. Adhmuz

    Adhmuz TechSpot Paladin Posts: 1,828   +633

    Please continue to take you time Take-Two, it's how games, well good games, are made.

    "something that Call of Duty may be suffering from" You mean absolutely what Call of Duty is suffering from.
    Last edited: Nov 21, 2015
    Burty117, robb213, OortCloud and 2 others like this.
  5. OortCloud

    OortCloud TS Addict Posts: 173   +55

    And Assassins Creed has died a horrible death from!
    robb213 likes this.
  6. SirGCal

    SirGCal TS Maniac Posts: 365   +136

    I agree. Do it right, make good stuff right away, no bunked releases then DLCs for a year then rush another title and end up in the 3-developer hole of CoD just to make a few bucks and lose more players. I also stopped playing CoD after a few releases. Ohh look, start all over again and they didn't even patch the cheating holes from the previous releases.. ugg.. PASS!
  7. Skidmarksdeluxe

    Skidmarksdeluxe TS Evangelist Posts: 8,647   +3,274

    I don't mind what strategy they use, I won't buy any game until the price has dropped by at least 50% anyway. New releases are just too buggy and expensive so I wait until the dust has settled.
    iampav likes this.
  8. Benny26

    Benny26 TechSpot Paladin Posts: 1,535   +51

    I absolutely agree with Take-Two's strategy, yes.
  9. robb213

    robb213 TS Maniac Posts: 330   +100

    Has always proven to be better for the long run, so of course I do!
  10. pandu9933

    pandu9933 TS Rookie

    Teach something to Ubisoft plz
  11. zavrix

    zavrix TS Enthusiast Posts: 26   +12

    I would be more likely to pre order a game which has had the time in development rather than something which is shoved down our throats yearly and never lives up to the hype because of rushed release all in the aid of the money hungry mofos that demand $ over quality.
  12. iampav

    iampav TS Rookie

    There is much to be said for a lengthy pause between titles, but as stated it's certainly no mark of quality. The originally extraneous (and some would say main content now) is online multiplay. Taking GTAV as just one example, seeing a great offline game issued then waiting for patches to play online really puts me off.

    By contrast, the likes of EA pump out annual updates to their franchises (often with additional releases for tournaments - I'm looking at you FIFA!). Whilst the games seem complete, there's barely any discernible differences aside from the roster. Sometimes things get worse - FIFA 16 seems slower and more complex to play and thus enjoy than FIFA 15 to me. Time definitely is not an indicator.

    Whilst the COD games seemingly have a quick turn around with annual releases, the three different licences (Modern/Advanced Warfare, Black Ops, Ghosts) through different studios ensure more time taken than may be apparent.

    The real problem for me is not time, but cash. The producers and studios want more of it and you can be guaranteed for every GTA, EA title, COD title, etc, etc, going forward, there will be 50-75% of a decent game (at £50+ RRP) with anything from £50-£150+ of in game purchases to fully enjoy it.

    The producers actually will not care how many titles they need to release when the "aftermarket" of games can make more than the game, regardless of how a person has bought the title. EA's Access channel opens the door for exactly this.

    The consumer has to react by being more savvy. My personal rules are:
    1) Don't buy every release of a favourite title.
    2) Don't necessarily buy a game on Day One.
    3) Avoid in app purchases

Similar Topics

Add your comment to this article

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...