r/PS5 • u/RobloxSpiderGoku • 10h ago
Articles & Blogs Rockstar Games Originally Planned to Develop GTA 6 Alongside Red Dead Redemption 2, But Plans Changed
https://www.ign.com/articles/gta-6-was-originally-meant-to-release-much-sooner-than-we-realized133
u/JKKIDD231 10h ago
I am also excited for their next game in Red Dead universe. Rob Nelson said the GTA 6 mechanics have laid the foundation and they will use all those assets and the next game won’t take a decade and come much sooner. I would say 5 years apart is the gap they are going for.
74
u/chciKaspp 10h ago
Hoping for new IP, La noire sequel, or new red dead
38
14
3
•
u/RodThrashcok 4h ago
A new LA Noire would be so rad. Not sure how financially successful the first game was, but basically anything from Rockstar post RDR2 and GTA6 (or really any Rockstar era) is gonna be a huge hit.
1
16
u/InternetDad 9h ago
Its also very cool to see a handful of familiar design/mechanical features in GTA6 that were successful in RDR2
9
12
u/FromChicago808 10h ago
Are we assuming they’ve got a small team starting on RDR3 already?
15
u/YouGurt_MaN14 9h ago
Nah I think all hands on deck since it's close to launching. I remember Roger Clark saying a week or two before launch they were still having him come in and record dialogue. Probably a couple months after they'll start dividing teams to being next project.
7
2
•
1
u/Junior_Reference_594 7h ago edited 4h ago
No RDR3 please. New IP or new entry in other dormant IPs.
7
•
u/grmayshark 4h ago
I mean you dont spend Rockstar money on something thats not a safe bet and RDR2 is the fourth best selling game of all time right after Tetris, Minecraft and GTA VI, so I think that is something they know they can put hundreds of millions into and easily make a lot of profit. They just no longer operate as a studio that does mid budget (for them) releases. If RDR3 sells half of RDR2 maybe they look to experiment with smaller releases again
•
u/Zalvren 4h ago
Anything is a safe bet with the Rockstar name on it. Of course, not something completely different but if they do an action adventure open world game (which is their "star genre"), it would be as huge as RDR whatever setting it's using.
If other studios can make new IP on their name, I think Rockstar can manage lol
•
u/grmayshark 4h ago
We just fully live in an IP-driven world now, thats what consumers expect and thats what studios will spend money on. There can be original, indie breakouts but the big studios and platforms will not make those games. Smaller scale projects that underperform have driven Xbox to the brink of collapse, and studios like Obsidian or Double Fine who were pumping them out got obsolved or asked to go independent. Something like Intergalactic I fully expect to launch and be the next Starfield, with lukewarm reviews and soft sales, and we’ll never see it again while Naughty Dog refocus on being the Last of Us and Uncharted studio.
•
u/Zalvren 3h ago
In an IP-driven world, developing new IP is very worthwhile. IP are dying over time. Xbox is actually the exact example of that, Gears, Halo, Fable are all almost irrelevant today (guess it's still wait and see for Fable). TES might be next. Either way, the failure of Xbox to develop new IP for a decade is a big reason of why they're in this position. Ubisoft is another example, Assassin's Creed and Far Cry alone can't support everything. You need new stuff.
When you got a name like Rockstar, it's easy to do a new one and it's always beneficial, see how CDPR made Cyberpunk (not technically new IP, but new in video games and on that scale) and now they're making bank from it. Imagine if they only did The Witcher forever, they'd miss out on a lot.
Sure if you do a bad game, it's not great for launching but this is assuming it's regular Rockstar quality of course (and the same action adventure open world).
Hell it could frankly be bigger than Red Dead IMO, it's not like cowboys is such a popular setting in video games. Red Dead is big simply because it's Rockstar and good (that IP would be worthless if someone else was doing a game). That can apply to something else.
•
•
u/Comprehensive_End592 58m ago
I love RDR, but I honestly kind of agree. I'd love to see them explore something new, like a pirate themed game, we don't get enough pirate games.
I'd kill for a good immersive pirate game made by Rockstar.-6
39
u/NLCPGaming 10h ago
Awwww people been blaming this on gta online and whole time it was rdr2 lmao
30
u/T_D_A_G_A_R_I_M 9h ago
I think most people assumed that GTA 6 didn’t really start development until after RDR2 was released.
8
u/BlackAfroUchiha 9h ago
"Full development" didn't start until after RDR2.
Previous articles mentioned that work actually began in 2015. If you followed some of the leaks, they had a Leonida map that they built within the GTA V engine dating back to 2015 (although it's kinda bare bones and different from the final map).
•
u/Aiden_734 3h ago
Everyone blames everything on GTA Online instead of thinking lol. I'm personally fine with them "milking" it because it gives them a bigger budget to make better games. GTA 6 owes a lot to GTA Online.
•
-11
u/Konker101 10h ago
Rdr2 came out 8 years ago. Plenty of time to release another installment but they fidnt
5
u/DAMP_ANON 9h ago
Well clearly not enough time since they started full development right after RDR2. Between COVID and doubling studio size, and people wanting to work at home, and reducing crunch its kind of obvious it would take a while. I mean RDR2 set the standards in depth but its a dull empty world compared to GTA 6. A GTA game takes wayyyy more work to hit that same level of depth or more.
5
u/GH00ST-SL4YER 9h ago
Covid happened and sometime developers and the higher up is being too ambitious for their own good
10
u/BlackAfroUchiha 9h ago
Unfortunately every Rockstar game has to be more ambitious and detailed than the last.
If you look at RDR2, it's not really a surprise why GTA VI has taken this long.
11
u/PleaseNone 9h ago
Spoken like someone who doesn’t understand game development at Rockstar but just wants to talk out of his you know what
•
3
2
u/QuentinTheGentleman 5h ago
Yeah, this isn’t news. You can find GTA VI weapon data leftovers in the RDR2 files, namely older weapons like the Browning Hi-Power and FAL, lending credence to the Project Americas development.
•
0
u/das_sparker 8h ago
Riveting title.
Initially one thing was going to happen, but then something else did.
-5
u/Tight_Balance_599 10h ago
They altered the deal pray they don't alter it further? I mean yeah GTA online cash changed everything...
6
u/regalfronde 10h ago
No, I think the development load for RDR II changed the requirements. That game is highly ambitious.
7
u/ToothlessFTW 10h ago
Or you could read the article and see they changed it because RDR2 was a massive project that needed more focus, and GTA VI was building up to be another ambitious project, so they delayed it.
2
-1
u/servebott 9h ago
useless info, did this reporter run out of thing to write, this “news” literally does not change anything, 100% clickbait trying to blend in with the trend
•
u/Prior_Worry12 4h ago
Yes, the beast. As in “we can milk these stupid fucks for ever because their whole lives are based on instant gratification “.
-13
u/mikayd 10h ago
Plans changed once that Money kicked in, like hold up we still eating good, put a pause on everything for now.
5
u/KingKontinuum 10h ago
Is that what the article says?
8
-1
u/duffterino 10h ago
like Rockstar is gonna say that GTA online being such a massive moneymaker meant there was less pressure to release GTA 6. they're not stupid
3
u/KingKontinuum 9h ago
Right, stupid would be believing Rockstar spent five years sitting around collecting Shark Card revenue while RDR2 apparently materialized out of thin air, requiring no developers, resources, or investment. Especially under an article literally explaining why GTA VI was deprioritized.
1
u/duffterino 9h ago
I'm not saying that RDR2 wasn't a big factor as to why GTA 6 took so long to develop. But think about it, if a company has made over $5B in revenue from micro transactions, wouldn't they milk that for as long as possible before launching a new game?
2
u/KingKontinuum 9h ago
Do you think companies just stop developing new products when an existing one becomes profitable? Rockstar was investing enormous resources into RDR2 while GTA Online generated revenue. And why would they need to delay GTA VI to keep monetizing GTA Online? You’re inventing a motive while ignoring the actual reporting.
Many of us work for multibillion-dollar corporations. My company even makes cars fictionalized in GTA VI. Imagine arguing that we’d stop developing new vehicles because our existing ones were profitable. That’s not how product development works. Rockstar was developing RDR2 and GTA VI while GTA Online was making billions.
1
u/duffterino 9h ago
I never said that Online paused or delayed development, you're putting words in my mouth. My point is that the $5B is a big financial safety net for Rockstar which means they were able to take more time to develop VI to make it as polished as possible
1
u/Marijuana_Miler 9h ago
How would releasing GTA6 reduce their GTAO revenue?
-1
u/duffterino 9h ago edited 9h ago
Because most people would be playing VI instead? obviously there will be online for VI eventually, but that will also take a lot of time and resources to develop. If you can make $5B as mostly passive income, then there's less incentive to create a whole new Online game immediately
2
u/Marijuana_Miler 9h ago
GTAVI is expected to sell 20-40 million copies in the first year. Which corresponds to 1.6-4.0B in revenue for TT2. The revenue for online has been falling YoY, but even at the current 500M per year that would mean the launch of 6 would provide the same amount of revenue as 4-8 years of shark cards. That is not including potential revenue from the GTA6 version of online which would probably bring in a similar amount of revenue.
The only thing that would threaten the revenue would be 6 releasing as a poorly reviewed game. So isn’t it more likely that Rockstar has held off on releasing 6 until the game is ready instead of holding off on releasing 6 because they have a current revenue stream?
0
u/duffterino 9h ago
I edited my comment to add "immediately" at the end so hopefully it's more clear. But yes, I agree with your point that them taking time to release VI is to make sure it's as detailed as possible for launch. Of course there were many other factors contributing to an actual delay of the game, but my point is they had the luxury to take more time to develop VI because they had a strong revenue stream from online.
Edit: My original comment was about how Rockstar isn't going to just come out and say that as it doesn't look good for optics1
-2
u/securinight 8h ago
I think a part of me died reading that headline. It's possibly the dullest, most pointless and irrelevant piece of information on the internet today.
365
u/TopBee83 10h ago
Per the article: They planned to develop both games simultaneously but once they realized the beast that was RDR2, they dedicated more resources and senior talent to finish that game.