Grand Theft Auto VI

[Nag]

 

[DANGERMAN]

6 hours ago, HandsomeDead said:

Wow, it's 2023 and we're finally seeing some videogame thicc arses.  

 

I guess the new one goes back to Vice City but having a broader rep of Miami, and maybe Florida more generally so I bet there is a lot of juice in that fruit.

 

I've also got GTA5 downloading.  There's a lot of jokes about how old it is but I'm gonna play it for the first time.  I think the LA setting was one of the reasons I was less interested in it because satirical depictions of that were a bit old hat.  Felt like I'd seen it all before.  I'll give it a fair shake, tho

If you like them thicc you should play the Crysis games 

[Metroid66]

6 hours ago, HandsomeDead said:

I've also got GTA5 downloading

 

Don't forget it's got a stellar fps mode. My last playthru was fps, and you can set it up so that it goes 3rd person when you enter a car. 

 

Makes it a bit more challenging too, cos those games are a bit too easy for non casuals I think.

 

Really enjoyed that playthru.

[HandsomeDead]

I might give first person a go and see how it feels.

 

52 minutes ago, DANGERMAN said:

If you like them thicc you should play the Crysis games 

 

I've heard playing it stealthy is hard because of all the clapping.

[Metroid66]

17 minutes ago, HandsomeDead said:

I might give first person a go and see how it feels.

 

 

The trick to it is that in 3rd person it's a cover shooter. In FPS mode snapping to cover doesn't really work so you play like COD, just positioning yourself behind cover then moving out to deliver the bad news. 

[shinymcshine]

Interesting story, regarding music use & payments (or refusal in this case!)

 

Heaven 17 Tell Rockstar to Go F-Yourself over GTA 6 Royalty Offer

 

TLDR - Rockstar offered them a one-off payment of $7500 for use of the song Temptation.

[Snaggletooth]

If that's the case too right, The money a GTA game pulls in they should do better than that, then again not the first time there have been stories about Rock Star being tight fisted with royalties.

[shinymcshine]

It probably explains too why the remasters end up with cut playlists (if that's what's on offer) !

[Nag]

Should they expect to be pulling stupid amounts of money for other people's work though?

 

I'm certain there's plenty of bands that would jump at the chance to be on a GTA soundtrack.

[Snaggletooth]

Depends Thematically what Songs the Devs want in their, With the likes of Tom Petty featured in the Trailer His estate is likely going to be able to demand a higher Royalty payment.

 

As of August GTA 5 has reportedly made $8.6 Billion Revenue, Even if you take out development and maintenance costs that's One hell of a Profit Margin.

I'm sure they could do better than $7,500, Yes there is the chance of exposure to new audiences, but given there is bugger all money in streaming I cant see exposure would have a big Financial reward to the Artist.

On the flip side, If its a timed license agreement or something like that on the song then money could represent duration track would be licensed in the game. (assuming it could be patched out)

[shinymcshine]

GTA V sold 200m - so even based on the paltry rate Spotify pay ($1000 for 1m streams, as quoted in the article) then that's $200,000 due if the song is played just once per game !

 

Hence $7,500 now looks incredibly mean, and the (rejected) counter offer of $75,000 not unreasonable.

 

 

[shinymcshine]

10 hours ago, Nag said:

Should they expect to be pulling stupid amounts of money for other people's work though?

 

I'm certain there's plenty of bands that would jump at the chance to be on a GTA soundtrack.

 

That's a bit of a circular arguement - as doesn't the inclusion of licenced music increase the pull of the game (i.e. R* are increasing interest in their game by the use of other people's musical compositions).

[one-armed dwarf]

 

10 hours ago, Nag said:

Should they expect to be pulling stupid amounts of money for other people's work though?

No but they should be paying a respectable amount I'd say (which 7500 isn't imo, sounds insulting for the reasons shiny mentions)

[Nag]

I'm not sure agree... millions of people who play the game won't even know that song is included on the game depending on what music stations they use.

 

In my opinion you can't over value something because of what it's being used for is uber popular. What do artists get if a song is used on a commercial? which could be viewed by millions.

[shinymcshine]

There's some rates here, which might suggest $7500 (one off payment) is pretty low ball (whereas $7500 for a defined period licence might be okay in some circumstances, but way off use in Commercials).

 

https://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/music-licensing4.htm

 

[Nag]

Fair enough... I will say that I firmly believe there isn't one single person in this entire world where the inclusion of Temptation would be the deciding factor on whether they buy this game though.

 

It would be interesting to see some rates for licensed music in games as well.

[shinymcshine]

I understand your point, I think artists are more aware of how much money others might be making off their products (inc. streaming etc) so just want a fair deal, and if it doesn't match their expectations are free to negotiate or walk away.

 

If they licenced 100 tracks at $7500 it's only $750k, for all the icon in-game radio channels, which seems peanuts in terms of dev costs and sales revenue - cheapstakes !

[HandsomeDead]

It says to me how dire it must be in music (I know it is already but it's always fun to be reminded).  Heaven 17 have been around a while and I'm sure they've licensed music before, not that I remember specifically but I must have heard Temptation in a film or show a few times over the years.  Point is they know the rates they've got before and they're much worse now, even on a project like GTA which likes to boast how it's the biggest entertainment 'thing' of all time.  

 

But there's very little organisation in music and everyone else is at the point where they're shrugging and accepting those meagre rates.  Temptation is a fairly iconic 80s track so I doubt others struggle to negotiate for much more.

[shinymcshine]

I guess that's part of it, many in the entertainment industry scraping by living hand to mouth, so for some $7500 pays the rent for a few more months etc. 

 

Then you've got game devs themselves who want to trim costs as you're only a few bad reviews from your game bombing and your potential revenue crashing (maybe not GTA, but who knows...?)

 

Meanwhile the Wikipedia page for Temptation suggests it was $7500 per songwriter (and there's 3 credited writers) so maybe $22,500 is actually not too bad....!?!? Albeit I can't see that sum / deal referenced anywhere.

 

*Update* - the per writer amount is mentioned in a Push Square article - but seems unconfirmed:

 

Push Square Heaven 17 & GTA 6

 

Here's the Wikipedia entry:

[DANGERMAN]

Whatever you think about it, the artist is free to tell Rockstar (or whoever) for fuck off and not take the money. I'm sure GTA will be fine, and presumably Heaven17 too