Grand Theft Auto VI

[shinymcshine]

TBH it'd fit the GTA vibe, or certainly Saints Row, if they sacked off paying for the original music and used those cheesy cover versions (not by original artists) that you hear in shopping centres etc - and I imagine they are a tiny fraction of the price !

[Snaggletooth]

Yup, and on the other hand, I'm sure a lot of artists see the biggest video game ever and assume they should get way beyond what would be a reasonable amount. 

 

So while I veer towards the side of the artist, it also wouldnt surprise  me if they expected more than a reasonable amount. 

 

Still an offer of 75k im sure that would have some level of "Temptation" 

[Nag]

🎵You've got to make me an offer

That cannot be ignored🎶 

[shinymcshine]

39 minutes ago, Nag said:

🎵You've got to make me an offer

That cannot be ignored🎶 

 

Fantastic relevant quote, but steady on, that's $150 (or maybe $15000) worth of lyrics they might chase you for.... 🤣

[shinymcshine]

I do wonder whether the future is in game music being streamed directly from Spotify/ YouTube Music/ Apple or whoever, in predefined playlists (radio channels) which might get over any perpetual rights issues* and pay the artist the market rate.

 

*Well, until an artist pulls their music, or sells the rights to another third-party etc, so maybe it's a good idea in principle but a terrible idea in practice.

[one-armed dwarf]

With that tho you lose all the unique Lazlo commentary

[shinymcshine]

I'm sure they could sequence the voice tracks and spoof ads into pauses and breaks in the music tracks etc 

[Nag]

1 hour ago, shinymcshine said:

 

Fantastic relevant quote, but steady on, that's $150 (or maybe $15000) worth of lyrics they might chase you for.... 🤣

 

I have my lawyers standing by...

[regemond]

19 hours ago, shinymcshine said:

I do wonder whether the future is in game music being streamed directly from Spotify/ YouTube Music/ Apple or whoever, in predefined playlists (radio channels) which might get over any perpetual rights issues* and pay the artist the market rate.

 

*Well, until an artist pulls their music, or sells the rights to another third-party etc, so maybe it's a good idea in principle but a terrible idea in practice.

 

I feel like this is where gaming will go anyway in some genres. You can feed in your choice of DAB stream in the Euro/US Truck Sim titles, and you've been able to rip your own soundtracks since the days of OG Xbox. Pretty sure Forza Horizon lets (or used to let) you stream your Spotify playlists, too.

 

Put 10-15 tracks in FIFA 26 and then 'encourage' playlists as a back of box feature. Boom. Done.

It would do a huge disservice to something like GTA, though. One of my favourite memories from 5 was bombing down the coastal road with Rihanna playing. GTA IV was all about the Phil Collins track. It's not going to pull me in if I'm listening to the same tunes I've been listening to since I was 16. You'll lose that sense of place, so in that respect, R* probably SHOULD be offering more for licensing.

[shinymcshine]

I was thinking more of GTA defined & bounded playlists (as aligned to the current radio stations) but hosted on a streaming service, so you'd still get the set songs and voiceovers etc, but the music isn't coded as part of the game, and therefore licencing is bypassed (as R* would pay whatever the going streaming rate is (for public performance) - or however they reach a contracted agreement with the service provider to pay the going rate).

 

Then they could periodically refresh to music tracks (or have a 'new music' radio station for that, so you can still keep those Rihanna / Phil Collins moments - as they are pretty special), or as you suggested, optionally allow custom playlists too.

 

I'm just surprised, given the shift in how most people listen to music nowadays, and the huge online GTA presence, that this isn't already a thing. As for the 'always online' requirement (for streamed music) - well sadly it's almost a prerequisite for modern gaming.

[Maryokutai]

I was about to say, that would be a very silent experience when playing offline, though I presume if any game can get away by just slapping an always online requirement on it, even for the singleplayer mode, it's probably GTA. In the same way HL2 brute-forced Steam on PCs back in the day (that was 20 years ago btw., just in case you haven't felt old in a while).

[shinymcshine]

Perhaps if they could put in embedded public domain tracks and some sad radio announcement about 'service disruption' to cover for offline they might get away with it ?

[Snaggletooth]

Wouldnt work with GTA but do miss the days when more studios made their own sound track rather than bunging in licensed songs. 

 

So many games would benefit from an original score, racing games are a big one in that respect. 

[shinymcshine]

After reading the 2025 release list of course this pops up as likely due out in 'the Autumn' - but I still know very little about it (in terms of what the gameplay loop, single player, is likely to comprise).

 

I've been a bit underwhelmed since GTA SA personally, GTA IV & V had some high spots for sure, but was there really anything that took forward the peaks from SA ? Suppose this is the problem that I never engaged with GTA Online - so I still ponder whether the single player experience of GTA VI will just be a reharsh of what we've already had, or if they'll finally bring a whole bunch of new ideas to the table (albeit from a corporate perspective the money is clearly with establishment of the online gaming hook).

[mfnick]

IV is actually the one I look back at most fondly. I just adored the physics in it & the handling model for cars. I like the serious tone as well which I’ve only appreciated more over time. 
 

I know IV is the Black Sheep of the series though so under no doubt it’s going to be nothing like that for me. I imagine that kind physics engine would be impossible to pull off today too. I wonder how much they’re going to sacrifice of the SP to make sure online is feature packed at launch. 

[Maf]

I really like Rockstar when they make “serious” versions of their games. GTA3, GTA4, RDR2. I’m much less interested when they make party versions of their games. Which judging by that trailer I expect this to be. 
 

Having said that it will probably be the biggest game of the decade so I’ll be playing it regardless 

[shinymcshine]

Maybe I miss the Peter Molyneux type of hyperbole we use to get about how amazing a new game will be as it will have features x,y and z* and instead we now often just get a clip reel where it's sometimes difficult to separate gameplay from cut scenes.

 

 

*Of course with Peter this actually meant you got; half of x; y was left out entirely but you might get a fraction of it in a DLC; and z was beyond the realms of physical possibility. Actually no, that's not right, with other people's hype you got that, with Peter you go a different game, almost, entirely.....

[Maryokutai]

Maybe the big thing will just be that the story will be playable in coop. As far as revolutions go it sounds boring but it's never been done in a Rockstar game from what I recall. They might have shied away from it previously because coop meant having splitscreen (when V launched on PS360 that was still a commonplace feature), but having it online-only would actually make it technically feasible.

 

But I might just take the trailer and premise a bit too literally and it's either something different, or nothing groundbreaking at all. It is a new GTA after over 10 years, for some new fans only the second they've lived to see come out, so they probably don't need to reinvent anything either way.

[Maf]

The thing about GTA is the deep clockwork systems of the world. GTA 4 had an in game internet and dating and GTA5 had everything from hunting to a stock market and 3 playable characters

 

It will be nice if they have innovations in how the story mode progresses but the big thing is how far will they go with making a living, breathing city this time

[one-armed dwarf]

I feel those aren't very clockwork tho, they're very isolated gimmicks without that interconnectedness implied by clockwork. But I don't think that's a bad approach either cause the sheer quantity of it gives an impression of such variety in its world and gameplay context switches. 

 

I don't doubt that this could end up being the most detailed game ever made, based off how RDRII might be close to that already. But my feeling of that game was that it felt weirdly pretentious or something, and none of it was worth it. If I went back to GTAIV I wonder if I'd feel the same, like these games aren't as profound as they pretend to be. 

 

So I would much prefer the more irreverent style of Vice City.