digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Microsoft paid $50 MILLION for GTA IV Downloadable Content

seekingalpha.com — From a conference call held with Take 2's CFO last week: "The first 25 million is for the first episodic content package that ’s supposed to go out and that is in March of ’08. That’s why it moved into current because it’s in the next 12 months. The second 25 will be for the second episodic, the episode, and that will be later in fiscal ’08."

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • neiltc13, on 10/11/2007, -26/+85For those that can't see it, scroll down to near the bottom of the page. This is absolutely insane. Going with the retail price and not the profit margin, which would be MUCH lower, if anything at all (and hence many many more units) Microsoft would need to sell 83,472 premium Xbox 360 consoles for GTA IV downloadable content alone just to recoup this cost and that's not including bandwidth charges or anything else!

    Fifty MILLION dollars eclipses even some of the more insane game budgets out there (Gears of War only apparently cost $10m to produce) so expect this content to carry a huge cost when it hits the marketplace. Indeed, it better be good and add some serious replay value otherwise Microsoft are going to be facing a heavy loss here.
    • WhereAmI, on 10/11/2007, -37/+18@neiltc13 (#7224730)
      Although the price of the content might be "expensive" I doubt it will not be reasonable, otherwise how would they make more profit? Microsoft has stated they will do whatever they can to make the 360 a success and take over the game industry. The home media center is the other half of the reason for the 360. I am simply not going to buy this content, plain and simple. PS3/Wii (if it comes out on Wii[no news recently...]) haters can go ahead and support Microsoft. I always knew they paid Rockstar for the dual release, it was never about 360 being better.

      I never said I won't play it, I am just not going to be buying it.
    • jimbojim, on 10/11/2007, -40/+10I call BS.
    • bryants, on 10/11/2007, -38/+118Not quite right. Every single disc sold of any game on the xbox 360 console must go through certification. And guess what every single game sold Microsoft reaps roylaties. So every single game of GTA IV will make microsoft money. They are putting themselves in a position that states get our console because GTA IV will have more content. And this is a smart move. Microsoft knows GTA is a system seller they have to make the game look more appealing for their system. And in doing this they're going to attract more people who were on the fence for this game. So you'll have to lower your forcast on how they're going to recuperate their losses. They'll make money from this deal. T2 has already made money from this deal. So from the looks of it this is a Win Win for microsoft and T2 but a lose for Sony.

      Personal rant:
      This is a dick move by Microsoft. And just goes to show you that if you have the money you can buy your way in to the hearts of millions. Microsoft learned a lot and put their learnings to use. And that is not a good thing. They learned to buy what sells systems. Buy studios that have a large fan base. Buy poplar franchise rights. Throw money at annouced games so they too can reap the benefits (Assassin's Creed anyone? I despise these moves. Sure I have a 360 and I love th console. I still feel dirty. I'd rather have Microsoft throw their game studio at creating games to compete with 'the next big thing'. That kind of thought can produce innovation.
      I mean come on! It's painfully obvious what Microsoft is doing to the game industry. If they manage to throw Sony out of the runnings, then they'll target Nintendo. Which is actually their target now if you've read any recent interviews. They want the casual game market. Now they want to position themselves as a casual-hardcore gaming machine so you can buy the hot blow-up-by-learning-from-endless-mini-games game. I for one do not welcome our new gaming overlord.
    • STKD, on 10/11/2007, -9/+117Yes. I bet Microsoft never did the math, either.
      /sarcasm.
    • lava, on 10/11/2007, -27/+43I think that's pretty smart of them. I ended up buying a ps2 for GTA:SA. When the new GTA comes out, I'm going to have to buy an xbox 360.

      "Personal rant:
      This is a dick move by Microsoft."

      Poor Sony, they don't have any money.
    • staffell, on 10/11/2007, -23/+9come on sony, COUGH UP!

      I'm seriously considering buying an xbox just for this now.
    • rheaume, on 10/11/2007, -39/+10Whatever kills the PS3! Go Microsoft!
    • simonpainter, on 10/11/2007, -3/+37I would love to think that Microsoft "didn't do the math" on this one but it's highly unlikely that a bunch of diggers know more about marketing strategy than the mighty war machine of MS. It works like this... they want to shift platform and the also want to shift content. They get $$'s for every bit of content they shift and that is the money spinner over and above the $$'s they get from the platform. The only reason they make the hardware is because then they get to control who can write content for it. A really good lure of some good content will cause people to go buy the platform and once they have the platform they will go get more content.

      A few years ago Sony did the same. Remember the 1 year exclusive on GTASA on the PS2? That was so that more people would buy a PS2 to get early dibs on the game rather than waiting for it to come out on the PC or whatever. This is no different.... grab the gamers by the balls and their hearts and minds will follow.
    • DCJoeDogaswell, on 10/11/2007, -15/+62How is this any different from what SONY did to SEGA during the Saturn years? SONY bought studio after studio to build up their 1st/2nd party games portfolio, but now MS does it and all of a sudden it's a "dick move". My how selective we are.
    • HyperJack, on 10/11/2007, -24/+12Microsoft are obviously feeling the heat now and have realised that Halo 3 alone is not going to win them the next-gen war.
      They are so desperate that they virtually have to bribe developers so that their console can have the edge
    • kenvsryu, on 10/11/2007, -10/+11It's funny that they could spend so much while charging for Live.
    • Ajajadude, on 10/11/2007, -7/+5Regardless of what some of you think, why WOULDN'T Microsoft pass on a big chunk of the costs to 360 owners through the cost of the download?
    • M3RCINIAN, on 10/11/2007, -18/+7Woo yay for microsoft being competitve. INSTEAD OF COMPETING, WE'LL BUY EVERYTHING OUT FROM PROFITS ELSEWHERE IN OUR BUSINESS, ARTIFICIALLY KEEPING OUR CONSOLE A VERY STRONG CONTENDER! WOO HA!
    • Anorhc, on 10/11/2007, -15/+10"Sony had the money to do this"

      Yes, but unfortunately for Sony, $50 million is like pocket-change for Microsoft.
    • godzillaWax, on 10/11/2007, -9/+4Gears of War only cost $10 million because a) they didn't factor in the cost of the Unreal Engine into that figure, and b) they outsourced work to China.

      Educate, sucka:
      http://arstechnica.com/journals/thumbs.ars/2006/10/5/5516

      Plus, none of this counts the money Microsoft sunk into marketing, which alone is probably at least $15 mil.
    • zeklown, on 10/11/2007, -3/+30@Anorhc
      Um..

      Sony Corporation (ソニー株式会社, Sonī Kabushiki-gaisha?) is a Japanese multinational corporation and one of the world's largest media conglomerates with revenue of $68.39 billion (as of 2006) based in Minato, Tokyo. (Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony)

      Microsoft Corporation (NASDAQ: MSFT) is an American multinational computer technology corporation with global annual revenue of US $44.28 billion and 76,000 employees in 102 countries. (Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft)

    • rwinograd, on 10/11/2007, -10/+9Lets see.... GTA3 (each iteration) sold around 12 million copies for the PS3.

      For GTA4:
      Lets say each of these expansions cost $5. Thats a potential for $60 million more for each expansion (with a cost of $25 million each). Not to mention the effect of of having more people buy your systems, which means more accessories, more xbox-live and more market share

      So while my numbers aren't no where near exact I think selling them for $5 is pretty cheap, and considering only 5 million people need to download each expansion to break even, thats not bad. Especially since the goal of this isn't to make $400 billion dollars in sales on this: its to dominate the industry by using a massive franchise away and bringing people to Xbox, and keep them buying XBox products, and Xbox live.

      Yep I'd say smart move.
    • DesignEx, on 10/11/2007, -17/+18If Mircosoft had this much money to spend on just downloadable content for a single game, why won't they replace all the faulty 360's they sold us.
    • rlutterb, on 10/11/2007, -5/+18Kids, this is called good business. If it doesn't work (which it will), so what?.. it's $50mm of billions in the bank. MS will still be in business.

      Say what you will however, big risks and big rewards is why Bill Gates can now give billions to humanitarian causes.
    • adamchristopher, on 10/11/2007, -9/+7@ bryants,

      you should have left it at "smart business move by Microsoft". calling it a dick move just shows what side of the fence you live on.

      if you want to talk about dick-moves, what about Sony's arrogance to not even try to hold on to third party exclusives, thinking their god-sole will sell enough for them to stay alive in the industry.
    • spling, on 10/11/2007, -8/+21@zeklown

      Is the Net income not a more accurate thing to be looking at here?

      Sony Corporation Net income: $1.042 billion USD (2006)
      Microsoft Corporation Net income: US $12.6 billion (2006)
    • insomniac8400, on 10/11/2007, -9/+3Clearly you are an idiot. Microsoft paid up to keep sony out. Plus they are gonna sell a lot of 360s because of gta and they extra content. They won't need to charge a lot because overall they will recoup the costs. Half the ps2s sold were 100% because of gta.
    • staticneuron, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2@godzillaWax

      What is your point? The cost of developing the engine should be attached to unreal not gears. The price of licensing should be attached which would only be around $700,000 dollars depending on use. Not to mention they outsourced to their own company? Is that how "outsourcing" works?
    • miyamotofreak, on 10/11/2007, -2/+18This has been completely misunderstood. From K Baird of VGN:
      This appears to be revenue deffered. This is not the same as Microsoft giving them 50 million. It looks more like Take 2 needs money, and said to Microsoft, "We'll give you exclusive rights, but you have to give us $50 million in advance." Which means, Take 2 is not going to get any profit from the episodic content for the first $50 million. And if they don't sell $50 million worth, they still owe Microsoft the money.

      It's a big gamble on Take 2's part. If GTAIV doesn't do as well as they hope, and/or gamers don't buy the episodic content, Take 2 might go belly-up. AND it would make Microsoft a principle owner of their debt. Allowing them to purchase the company at a cheaper price.

      You have to read between the lines when gaming websites take financial information and say things like, "Microsoft buys exclusive rights!" Which is not what happened here. Take 2 borrowed money from Microsoft in exchange for those rights. That's a big difference, and doesn't bode well for Rockstart and Take 2.
    • staticneuron, on 10/11/2007, -6/+2$50 million is going to make Take-Two go belly up?

      http://ir.take2games.com/ReleaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=248580

      Somehow their number do not paint the picture of them "needing" to ask microsoft for anyhting. It still makes more sense that this is a move played by microsoft to make their system look more attractive than a cry for help from take-two.
    • EochaidRiata, on 10/11/2007, -2/+20#1 best selling console game of previous generation: GTA San Andreas
      #3 best selling console game of previous generation: GTA Vice City
      #4 best selling console game of previous generation: GTA 3

      $50m was worth it.

    • GerrardIsLegend, on 10/11/2007, -5/+0I just hope they don't take things that they would have normally included and make it downloadable. Paying for online should be enough. Good thing I don't.
    • godzillaWax, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4@staticneuron:

      If you don't count the cost of the Unreal Engine, or at least its partial cost spread as the total cost spread across all games that use it, then you are essentially hiding a significant portion of how much it cost to make Gears of War. A game of Gears of War's level of quality could NOT be made by a different studio for just $10 million, because that studio would first need to make the engine. Hence the true cost is much higher.

      Additionally, whether or not the workers in China were a part of Epic or not, they're not getting paid western wages. If they were, there would be no point in having work done in China in the first place. Not every company has dirt cheap Chinese labor to add to a game. Hence the true cost rises even more. You have to factor what the US or Japanese or English or wherever wages would be for the comparable amount of work done.

      And third, you're still disregarding the marketing. Games do not exist in a vacuum, separate from their advertising. This does not factor into the development of the game like the two above, but it is still a cost in making the game and still a cost that gets applied to any game. Gears of War had a relentless ad campaign and recurring television spots. That all does not come cheap. Microsoft might have footed the bill for it, but regardless, it is still a cost of producing a game.

      Hence, the true cost of Gears of War most likely triples.
    • kelbear, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7How is this bad for gaming?

      This is a studio getting rewarded for having a history of making games that people want. So they're getting money thrown at them as a result. Not really headlining stuff here.
    • daridave, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1Eh. Thank you Microsoft, I guess.

      I mean, they're spending for my entertainment. That's somehow cool... especially after I spent over a hundred dollars on a frickin' RACING WHEEL ( that doesn't even have a shift stick... pathetic!)
    • staticneuron, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3@godzillaWax

      I put up the cost for licensing because the unreal engine was not made for gears of war. By your logic every game that uses the engine should have the cost it should make the engine? Or they have a special burden because its a different team that is apart of the same company? I guess square enix should post the cost of what it took to make the engine as well when describing the last remenant?

      It's a certain type of logic that dictates what cost should be attributed to agame and what is not. But the sheer fact is that their game cost 10 million to make. The engine is 700,000 to license. This should put all these games are expensive to make crap to rest. It turns as if it is a choice. You can license an engine or you can make one on your own.
    • razorsharp, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1In retort to the "a bunch of diggers don't know as much about marketing as Microsoft." Uh, just because Microsoft knows more about marketing than me doesn't mean they're making money. IT'S A FACT THAT THE XBOX PROJECT HAS LOST BILLIONS OF DOLLARS. So tell me, without a monopoly or near-monopoly of the gaming market, how will they ever recoup their losses? They won't. You don't have to be a ***** economics major to know that. Anyone who is semi-intelligent and willing to do a little research can learn all about Microsoft and their obsession with monopolizing software worldwide. They spent millions putting Netscape navigator out of business even though it was a FREE product. The only problem they had with Netscape was that it ran on other OS's. So anyone who pulls out the "Microsoft knows what they're doing, this is good for business" ***** doesn't know what Microsoft is doing. This isn't good business, this is dirty business. This is about Steve Ballmer and Bill Gates obsession with controlling software, and no more.
    • formulathree, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3"Yes, but unfortunately for Sony, $50 million is like pocket-change for Microsoft."

      Unfortunately, for this dumb ass, financial revenue information for both companies was not available mentally. Psst, Sony takes in more money, bingo.
    • formulathree, on 10/11/2007, -3/+4"Is the Net income not a more accurate thing to be looking at here?"

      I think Stock Price is a more accurate thing.

      Microsoft 30.49 - Stagnant for the past 3 years
      Sony 53.83
    • jcoakes9, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2@formulathree

      Compare stock price indices of Microsoft and Sony (at least on NASDAQ) and you'll find that over the past 5 years Microsoft has outperformed Sony by a significant margin.

      http://quotes.nasdaq.com/quote.dll?mode=basics&kind=&timeframe=5y&intraday=off&charttype=ohlc&splits=off&earnings=off&movingaverage=None&lowerstudy=volume&comparison=on&index=&symbol=MSFT&symbol=SNE&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&FormType=&mkttype=&pathname=&page=charting&selected=SNE


      But at this point, its splitting hairs. And while either company can afford this transaction, I'm not sure that Sony is an a hury to dump $50 million into its gaming department, which already incurred a 4th quarter loss of about $981 million.
    • Tikkimann, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2@dcjoedogaswell:

      I didn't know this myself, but I'm not surprised to learn that Sony's been doing this stuff for years.

      It seems that only recently are people realizing what kind of company Sony is. And to think: if it weren't for the PS3 screw-ups, we might have gone on loving them forever.
    • ShivaOritiner, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Ok - time for marketing 101.

      This is called a loss leader. Microsoft is taking a loss in one section to allow for future growth elsewhere.

      If you're a big GTA fan and have been up in the air if you're going to go with the PS3 or 360 version, the promise of exclusive content may push you to the 360 side. If you have not yet purchased a 360 or a PS3, this is a crucial move for them.
  • edge10, on 10/11/2007, -30/+19If true, MS was robbed.
    • Renton, on 10/11/2007, -13/+4Keep in mind these are the guys that sold their console at a loss for over a year just to get market share. I'm surprised Sony didn't try to pay them off too.
    • Bishop256, on 10/11/2007, -7/+7@renton
      keep in mind ps3 put sony in the hole by a HUGE amount, but then again ps2 didnt even break even until one of the last years before ps2, its not about the system, its about the games and market share. Both sony and microsoft risk it for the gamers.
    • Renton, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3@bishop256

      Yeah, that was kind of my point.
    • widman, on 10/11/2007, -4/+4It's still a lot of money...
  • lardoandkeg, on 10/11/2007, -56/+4Why did you like directly to the transcript? Next time link to a story that talks about what happened and links to the transcript for those that actually want to dig through it. That is the reason people use quotes.
    • WhereAmI, on 10/11/2007, -5/+24@lardoandkeg (#7227883)
      New here?

      May 31, 2007

      Yup.
    • Tahiri, on 10/11/2007, -4/+11I'm hoping lard was kidding
    • neiltc13, on 10/11/2007, -3/+58I linked directly to a transcript because if you do that there is NO spin whatsoever. There's no point linking to a fansite because there will be criticism or favouritism and it's stupid to link to random news sites because when this hits the homepage they'll be making money from ad revenue for a story they did no work to find.
    • Tahiri, on 10/11/2007, -0/+19 neiltc13, he had better be kidding. Diggs terms of use prohibits what he suggested. You're supposed to link to the source, like you did. And I thank you for it.
    • dpl_, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10Lardoandkeg is just another blog spammer.
  • neteffex78, on 10/11/2007, -10/+3I cant find the damn part about GTA...
  • Bodhesatva, on 10/11/2007, -4/+10I don't see it. Someone quote it. I'm willing to believe it, but this is a long statement full of stuff that's effectively impenetrable for me.

    Just point it out. A search for "50" and "million" and "Microsoft" and "Grand" did not help me find this, so I'm a little suspicious.
    • lardoandkeg, on 10/11/2007, -29/+7I found a site that posted the story so you dont have to dig through the transcript.

      http://digg.com/xbox_360/Microsoft_Drops_50_Million_On_Grand_Theft_Auto_IV_Downloadable_Content
    • Zoxy, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9search episodic content and it will refer you to the quotes.

      Evan Wilson - Pacific Crest Securities

      Thank you. And as it relates to the deferred revenue chunk associated with the episodic content on X-Box 360, you can see that $25 million of that moved into short-term deferred. Could you give us any sense of when that’s going to hit the P&L? Will we see $25 million at one time and then the second 25 or will it be a slow bleed?

      Lainie Goldstein

      The first 25 is for the first episodic content package that’s supposed to go out and that is in March of ’08. That’s why it moved into current because it’s in the next 12 months. The second 25 will be for the second episodic, the episode, and that will be later in fiscal ’08.
    • dpl_, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8lardoandkeg: "I found a site that posted the story so you dont have to dig through the transcript."

      Sure you just found a random site, not one you've been spamming like crazy on Digg.
  • xTRUMANx, on 10/11/2007, -8/+4I wonder why Microsoft just didn't pay Rockstar to make the game an exclusive. Wouldn't that have made their whole plan of becoming number 1 easier. It's obviously not a money issue.
    • Murphious, on 10/11/2007, -2/+17I'd imagine that buying exclusivity on the whole game would cost a lot more than buying exclusivity on just downloadable content. Look at it this way; They paid $50 mil for downloadable content.. How much would they have to pay for the entire game to be a console exclusive?
    • samdu, on 10/11/2007, -1/+21And just because Microsoft has billions upon billions of dollars in cash doesn't mean that the gaming division has access to all of it. Each division must operate within the confines of a budget.
    • simonpainter, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7Sony had a one year exclusive on PS2 for GTASA and that was all that Rockstar would give them. It's not in an game manufacturers interest to grant exclusivity forever because some day you may want to port all that code which has already been written and paid for to another platform and squeeze a few more bucks out of it. To grant exclusivity to MS they would have to look at how much they could have sold in worldwide PS3/PC sales (and any other format they can run it on).
  • linkin1, on 10/11/2007, -37/+5Microsoft is disgusting, in a world where business should be in competition where the consumers should get the best and cheapest materials microsoft is doing the exact opposite, now the CEO's will cash the money, microsoft will get bigger marketshare and we end up paying even more! wtf!!?!?

    • McTendo, on 10/11/2007, -8/+27I know! I am disgusted at M$$$$$$$$ for forcing them to say yes. I read an article that stated they hate and are even allergic to money and were forced to roll around in it while M$$$$$ laughed and spat on them from within their jewel-encrusted, anti-linux/pro "mac abortion" abomination of a stainless steel, glass-floored helicopter with gold trimming and night vision.
    • jedioniram, on 10/11/2007, -3/+0Hey, buying a 360 and GTA4 plus the exclusive stuff is... (very likely) still cheaper than it would be to buy a PS3 and GTA4! Wow, it's like, a bargain to the consumer! Maybe that's some crazy logic right there, but there is nothing wrong with making business deals, and this works out better for the consumer, they know what is coming and what they can get and can make educated decisions.
  • varaon, on 10/11/2007, -10/+5/* clipped */ :P Others type faster than me, nvm.

    Basically, the 50M is profit, no payout from MS whatsoever. Buried as inaccurate.
  • InstantRamen, on 10/11/2007, -18/+3Ok this is what i think. does Rockstar owe Sony for making the GTA series as big as it is . it is cool if they wanna make more money. hell they are a company . but giving that the PS3 is not doing well . could rock star make the GTA IV only on the ps3 for the first year then port over to the 360. Sony did help them make it big.
    • STKD, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Short answer? Nope. Not possible. Already licensed up.
    • zeroduck, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6Or did Rockstar help make Sony's PS2 big?
  • dreadstar, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2450 million for DLC?

    I shudder to think what Microsoft offered, or what Take 2 asked for, to make GTA IV 360 exclusive.
  • Madr0xcide, on 10/11/2007, -3/+4Ok how is microsoft buying their way in to the market any different than what was done in the past? The makers of consoles pay money to the developers who make good games and try to keep them exclusive, this is nothing new. The obvious cost problem for new games now is a problem but hey you can't blame microsoft for getting creative with this, this move doesn't really hurt the sony community at all since we all still get gta but microsoft went out there and really tried to offer more for their customers.
  • tacklebox, on 10/11/2007, -16/+5Cant say I trust the source. Buried.
  • kenvsryu, on 10/11/2007, -8/+28Another year in the red for Microsoft Gaming.
    • heavyness, on 10/11/2007, -5/+7no, Halo 3 is coming out. it will be a profitable year for the games division...

      besides, for everyone 1 system sold, that is 5 arcade games, 3-4 regular games, and a bunch of controllers, headsets, and other accessories. and don't forget movies/tv shows on the marketplace and downloadable content like wallpaper and gamerpics. oh, and a year subscription to Live.
    • Uranium118, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4The 360 is successful so far, very successful. It will make up the 2 billions lost to enter the market with the first Xbox. This is a long term project, Micrsoft has the ressources to continue.
    • spidl, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1This money could have been factored in last year's budget for Microsoft. They were talking a lot about exclusive content at last year's E3.
  • frygar, on 10/11/2007, -20/+4It doesn't hurt now, but when Microsoft Gaming TM is the new (and only) console in town, I can assure you, it's going to sting more than a little. This act reeks of desperation.

    That being said, I've already pre-ordered GTAIV for the PS3.
    • EvilWalksWithMe, on 10/11/2007, -4/+16No one cares what you've pre-ordered.
    • jedioniram, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2If there was only one system out there, and the consumer didn't like it, you know what would happen? Less people would buy it (unless you have that new Video Game Addiction disease). There is still PC gaming, and there will be independent developers and people that work to make products "for the people". No company that would be stupid enough to alienate their fanbase will survive, someone will always come along and knock them down.
  • MoDubbz, on 10/11/2007, -5/+6whats funny to me is how some people forget that Sony is a HUGE cooperation also. MS isn't trying to tumble the Sony corp. but is is trying to make its console more appealing. DLC is a great way to do it. I'm not sure on the accuracy on the cost, but its a smart business move. PS3 has made its self less attractive with a high sticker price and Microsoft is just trying to grow a larger fan base. don't automatically think that ms is trying to take over the world cause this happens all the time. look at AT&T
    • razorsharp, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2You're a retard. Sony is a HUGE company, but they have profit margins they work with. Microsoft, for the past 7 years, have raked in money from licensing a version of Windows which has barely been updated. Sony may be huge, but they don't have a software licensing program on a monopoly that prints money. Do you think Bill Gates is the richest man in the world because his company is as successful as Sony? No. He's the richest man in the world because of sleezy contracts he strong-armed his partners into. Buy a Dell with Linux pre-installed - Microsoft is paid for a Windows license on that computer. Dell isn't stupid, they find the contract appalling, but it's not something that's negotiable.

      No company has the resources to do what Microsoft does nor the top brass willing to do it. They make capitalism look bad, which is the main reason I hate them so much.

      Oh, yeah, and look at AT&T. The government had to break up their MONOPOLY.
      • Trent0090, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Very well said dude. To be honest if MS didn't have a strangle hold on PC gaming I bet Linux would take like wild fire, same with Apple (though I'm not a apple fan, they need to learn how play 3rd party.)
  • thisissami, on 10/11/2007, -21/+1i agree whole heartedly with bryants. i really hope the playstation brand is as strong as i think it is. i hate microsoft to the max for their dirty business that involves money usage only... they should use that money instead to hire new programmers/animators and make new studios to make new games, like sony has been doing (and that's not to say that they haven't bought studios, but they've been doing A LOT better than microsoft when it comes to honest ways of dealing with things).

    man i really hope sony and nintendo kick microsoft's ass this gaming generation. i know i'm getting a PS3 and a wii... and for now my PS2 still satisfies me (i'm playing FFXII right now, and getting Okami and Psychonauts soon).
    • MoDubbz, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8how does honesty play into this? you base honesty on your own sense of morality, but business is a whole different animal. what MS is doing is within the rules and laws. its not like they are holding Take 2 family hostage and saying "give us DLC or else". come on man, this is how companies operate; acquisition
    • Repeater2000, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9You are going to play Psychonauts on your PS2?
      The game MS funded and spent close to 15 million dollars on and got close to nothing in return?

      "they should use that money instead to hire new programmers/animators and make new studios to make new games"

      That worked wonderfully, you also might want to google "True Fantasy Live Online" when you get the chance.

    • SomeManbeapig, on 10/11/2007, -4/+12stupid fanboyism crap
    • SomeManbeapig, on 10/11/2007, -14/+5digg down double post
    • flamebot, on 10/11/2007, -9/+2you know ***** about tech, so just stfu
    • Wo1ke, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I was so upset when true fantasy never came out! :(
  • synaesthesia, on 10/11/2007, -1/+21Congratulations Rock*, $50 million is probably enough to buy a rocket and launch Jack Thompson into the sun
    • Monti0, on 10/11/2007, -6/+0Thanks synaesthesia!

      You just made me realize why John Carmack is so interested in getting into space...
    • smokespliffz, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3or to sort out their accounts problems
  • lazyguy, on 10/11/2007, -22/+2You know what... for 50 MILLION dollars, I am thinking that Microsoft paid Rockstar for a last minute cancellation of PS3 GTA IV. That would really make sense... as 50 million for dlc alone is not worth that price.

    Imagine, just as the Sony fans talk and await GTA IV news and drools over the game, it is CANCELED and can only be had on the 360. To add to that, Halo is there too.
  • UWTKO, on 10/11/2007, -5/+4For all the people claiming that Sony made Rockstar and that they owe them something you should really wake up and smell the flowers. This is business for better or worse Rockstar is going to take the highest bidder at this point, you might be loyal to Sony but these are companies who care about the bottom line which is that Microsoft offered them more money for the exclusivity of this content.
  • smurf22, on 10/11/2007, -5/+12When you have to pay 50 million for DOWNLOADABLE content you know somethings up.
    • apoc06, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4does anyone know if microsoft ever stated that the gta IV downloadable content will be free, or at cost to the consumer?
    • shit, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3Downloadable Content is rarely free. Some DLC, like new multiplayer maps for Gears of War, start off at a price of $10 and become free in 6 months. On the other hand, larger DLC like Oblivion's Shivering Isles expansion costs $30. If GTA IV is an amazing game with massive, exclusive DLC, then Microsoft will be laughing all the way to the bank. A great business move on their part, but horribly unfair for a multiplatform game. We can only hope PS3 owners get some lovin' eventually. And hell, we can only hope PC gamers get to play the game.
    • bIuebonics, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7"When you have to pay 50 million for DOWNLOADABLE content you know somethings up."

      yea, business and marketing strategy.
    • dRuNk3nIrIsHmEn, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2When you have to pay 50 million for DOWNLOADABLE content...

      ...you know that this game will be a HUGE success.
    • spidoman, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1You know they are going to nickel and dime the customer to make up the $50 million.

      There is gunna be so much 5-10 dollar DLC it's just stupid. *Goes back to PC gaming and free modding so DLC isn't really necessary*
  • ucdbunny, on 10/11/2007, -12/+17with microsoft buying up studious and paying for exclusives will only hurt gaming in the long run
    • flamebot, on 10/11/2007, -13/+7don´t be an ass, that statement is ridiculous
    • EvilWalksWithMe, on 10/11/2007, -8/+2Why? Would you rather every game was PS3 exclusive? Or perhaps make EVERY game multi platform so there is no reason to buy all three or one over the other? So in the end it's just a matter of which corporate giant you wish to support?

      Silly child, that will never help the gaming industry.
    • GhostToon, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3Would you rather EA buy up all the studios?
  • Bfettmaul, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1UWTKO. You are right. It's not like Rockstar has turned their back on Sony, but R* is just doing what is the best for the company, with Take2 falling in stock, it is the best choice. Rockstar Sony and Microsoft are going to make a bundle with GTA4. Take2 is just reaping the benefits. Also, check out LA Noire. a GTA-style game that takes place in 1930s LA.
  • plutpwnium, on 10/11/2007, -8/+3BURIED. Duplicate Story. Already saw the same thing TWICE yesterday.
    • neiltc13, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1This was the first story submitted to Digg on this topic, I know because I checked thoroughly.
  • pronouncable, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6Jack Thompson just had a heart attack.
  • skyfire1, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11And I thought Oblivion downloadable content was expensive.
    • dRuNk3nIrIsHmEn, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3We all thought it was expensive. But we still bought it.

      We will all think the GTA IV content is too expensive. But we will still buy it.

      It's sad, but true.
    • spidoman, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1No, I'll wait a year, get it on PC and get all the free mods I want.

      I hate the pricks complaining about the price then buying it anyway. If this touches my PC gaming I'm going on a rampage.
  • flamebot, on 10/11/2007, -5/+3boo hoo more gaming for all of us, why even discuss this... a lotta hate on digg
  • knodi, on 10/11/2007, -6/+1For 50million I'm how the DLC is going to be like a expansion just like with Oblivion.
  • knulpm, on 10/11/2007, -9/+10The reason I think this comes off as a dick move (and yes, Sony could have easily done the same thing) is that it seems to be not so much adding something for those who own your content, it's taking away something from those who don't.

    It wasn't like Rockstar/Take 2 announced GTAIV, then Microsoft paid a lot of money for them to develop downloadable episodic content for them. When GTA IV was announced the implication is that there would be expansions for both....and now Microsoft bought exclusivity so that SOMEONE ELSE doesn't get it.

    Listen, I'm a huge PS3 hater myself, but this is just a dick move by Microsoft.
    • neiltc13, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4The content was announced as Xbox 360 exclusive on the same day the game was announced back at E3 in May 2006. Don't blame anyone but yourself for trusting misinformation.
  • rick2k, on 10/11/2007, -16/+8Wow they are that desperate?..

    Pathetic.
    • vawksel, on 10/11/2007, -15/+4Sony showed much more desperation when they locked in one year contracts on GTA3, Vice City and San Adreas.

      Sony is much more desperate than Microsoft. MS is locking in bonus content, Sony locked the whole ***** game.

      ***** SONY.
    • EvilWalksWithMe, on 10/11/2007, -9/+0"Sony showed much more desperation when they locked in one year contracts on GTA3, Vice City and San Adreas.

      Sony is much more desperate than Microsoft. MS is locking in bonus content, Sony locked the whole ***** game.

      ***** SONY."

      I'm not sure why exactly, but I had a great laugh while reading that. And for a little while afterwards.
    • bIuebonics, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4so, how successful is your business rick2k?
  • aggies11, on 10/11/2007, -4/+7Smart move by M$, and contrary to what some may say, financially probably wise also.

    While they likely won't make the money back on GTA IV sales alone, they are paying for exclusivity. What exclusivity gives you, hopefully, is a reason for people to have your console over someone else's. What that does is give you a higher install base. The larger the install base, the more games that are sold over all (all titles, not just one). Since Microsoft makes money on every single game sold for the 360, if the install base increases enough from this move, then they will financially be able to recoup the costs, possibly more.

    How much of a draw will the exclusive downloadable content have, is a good question though. This move is a gamble, a smart gamble, but a risk none the less.

    Aggies
    • Trent0090, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Well it could be a smart move or the market could reject it and there could be a large backlash. I share a 360 with my roommates right now. I know everyone is going to buy their own but because of things like this I may just do a Ps3 instead.
  • funnydale, on 10/11/2007, -7/+8Achievement Unlocked:
    Successfully Flushed Bill Gate's Money Down the Drain.
    50,000,000 Points.
  • vawksel, on 10/11/2007, -8/+7Sony did worse, and none of you complained about it then. Sony locked in the GTA series with 1 year exclusivity contracts. Microsoft is doing none of that, they are merely locking in exclusivity on bonus content. Suck it up. At least both 360 and PS3 owners can play at launch on the same day.

    Its not a "dick" move, they want you to buy a 360 so they are fronting all the cash to make that happen.

    It's highly likely that if they didn't pay $50m in advance then there may of never been exclusive content, ever.

    Besides, how many PS3 owners can really be pissed off? Are there any PS3 owners?... The PS3 seems to be stacking up at my local BestBuy/Costco/Fry's Electronics now... Seriously they are massively in stock now everywhere here in Northern California.... Unlike the Nintendo Wii, which I still can't ***** get.


  • Rusty747, on 10/11/2007, -14/+6All in time,

    Microsoft may swim in their money from GTA 4 but just wait,

    When quantitites in the PS3 boost and Rockstar learns to code for the PS3 they'll be able to make a far more impressive version of GTA than what the 360 will ever do.

    So in my eyes, it was pathetic for MS to go all BS but soon they'll realize what the PS3 has in store for them.
    • EvilWalksWithMe, on 10/11/2007, -4/+11Hahaha...

      See that? That was me laughing at the lunacy of your comment.
    • K111, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Oh Rusty, you're wrong, insane, wrong again, and wrong again.
  • loganhid, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Lets just enjoy gaming. hey, one day these consoles will be cheap as chips and for those not able to afford one now, can still enjoy the gaming later
  • kinseyincanada, on 10/11/2007, -2/+450 million for Microsoft is pretty much like pennies to them, also they will probably make it up in the sales of the down loadable content,depending on what it is, if its new missions it or maybe even a new area it could easily cost $15 so in order to make the money back they only need to sell around 3 million and there will probably be more then just one piece of down loadable content so in the end, just the DLC will make Microsoft money plus it will sell a ton of more systems.
  • rvreeland, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4hasn't Microsoft been losing money anyway on the 360 despite the success of the console? I don't think they mind to spend $50 mil for this, they're probably thinking the ends will justify the means, and this is just another move to solidify their place in the market.
    • zeroduck, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2From current reports (just look around), Microsoft makes a profit on the systems they are building. As a whole, they've lost money--but if they continue this trend, they will be in the black.
      • Trent0090, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0The only reason Microsoft is losing money on 360 is because they shipped out a defective product to soon. (case in point having to extend the warranty form one to three years.) What Ps3 fan boys are not saying which is weird, is that Sony had one of the best launches for a counsel ever.
  • mattieshoes, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3That's so fricking smart. Why did the Xbox lose out? Too many great games were ONLY available on the PS2. They're doing their best to make sure that the best games (or more content for them) is available on the X360.
    • EvilWalksWithMe, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3Wow... someone with common sense. People like you are a dying breed on digg. I hope you live long and prosper.
    • deici66, on 10/11/2007, -7/+0yea sequels that were exclusives on ps2 last gen while sony is exploring new territory with games in development that are a breath of fresh air.
    • vhold, on 10/11/2007, -3/+3The xbox was also late, expensive, and awkward. It did get microsoft's foot in the door though, and paved the way for real competition.

      Nintendo was absolutely right to get out of the giant monster console fight and to carve out new markets. They'd be getting pulverized so bad now if they had stayed the course.
  • loganhid, on 10/11/2007, -3/+11I'll laugh my ass off and probely cry if this new GTA turns out to be an absolute *****
  • tony4moroney, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2microsoft are interested in moving more systems. think long-term. a lot of people love sony because it held down a lot of exclusive deals, even though sony has shot itself in the foot several times in the foot over ps3 it still has a reputable fanbase. if micosoft can build its brand, and make people recognise that microsoft holds the best exclusive content come next generation it could gain more marketshare. think ps2 sales. 100 million. its an intelligent long-term investment.

    long-term investment. id take microsofts decision over any petty: cost - unit sales math anyday.
    • apoc06, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1regardless, $50 million for two expansions is nothing to scoff at. great move on MS's part, but i have to wonder if and who will actually end up footing the bill for that content? more than likely it will be consumers. MS wont bite the bullet for $50 million just to please its consumers, it will make that money back by charging most likely.
  • Thermopylae, on 10/11/2007, -8/+4Microsoft is getting desperate. They know they have to do these things early before the PS3's potential is fully realized.
    • neiltc13, on 10/11/2007, -3/+3Desperate? If that's the case, I'd probably call it smart more than anything else.
  • Repeater2000, on 10/11/2007, -5/+1Paying for Potential right?
  • ryanscott, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1talk about baller'
  • ASSASSYN, on 10/11/2007, -8/+3I love microsoft!
  • charityjustice, on 10/11/2007, -0/+51. MS isn't paying $50 mil to help GTA4 sales on the 360. MS is paying $50 mil to promote the 360 itself. Folks comparing this total to individual game development budgets are completely missing what is going on here.

    2. MS would not have paid $50 mil unless they believe they stand a good chance of returning that much and more from the move. All the master economists second-guessing this move while living in their parent's basement are only staying there by choice I suppose
  • djfreex, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1Two comments:
    1. From a company point of view; I think $50 mil is whole a lot to pay for exclusive episodic content. you can create your own exclusive for that.
    2. GTA is a massive and immensive game already, I am not sure people will be very excited to buy episodic content after they finish the game. Also, there is no guarantees that this content will be as good as the game.

    I think it is too early to judge the success of episodic GTA before we see it. Episodic gaming seems to be trend now, but there is no guarantees its gonna work for all AAA titles. We dont know if it is working for HL2 yet for sure. Valve even says this is a trial.
    • catharz, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1cdnyny: "You can create your own exclusive for less, sure. But you can't create your own exclusive that comes with the already established HUGE fanbase like GTA for ANY amount of money."

      You're assuming the fanbase can be bought. I own a PS3 and I'm as likely to buy an Xbox as M$ are likely to produce a well performing OS without bugs. Not that I love Sony ("loving" a company is just retarded IMO), but I do hate M$ and the way they conduct their business. I consider this akin to M$ giving SCO money for their Linux lawsuit. They love giving money to other companies when it stuffs up their competition.

      I purchased ALL of the previous GTA games, but I'm not buying this one even if reviews for this are better than 9.5/10. I've already e-mailed them to tell them to kiss my pre-order goodbye. I may miss out on a great game, but there are other games coming out for PS3 that look better (my opinion, YMMV).

      Also, I don't think R* really needed this to push sales. There was already going to be a lot of 360 owners buying GTA without it. Sure, it may flush them with cash (always a positive thing in business), but it may alienate quite a few of their fanbase. That probably won't hurt in the short term, but if PS3 overtakes 360 (which I think will eventually happen), it may hurt them then.
    • DrunKao, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3LOL @ PS3 owners boycotting GTA IV. Maybe you should sign this petition Catharz --> http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/GTAIVdcforPS3Owners

      "Hahaha, thats funny...I'm never buying a GTA game again. Thats unfair that we don't get downloadable content..."

      "same here, hopes of getting gta iv are over."

      "If this is true, then I will not buy this game."

      3rd party games are already performing badly on the PS3 as it is. 3rd party companies don't need you guys actively boycotting them as well.
    • catharz, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2@drunkao

      If all the x-platform games are going to be developed based on the lowest common denominator, I don't want them anyway.
      I was actually a bit disappointed when R* stated that GTA IV would be exactly the same on 360 and PS3.
      I'd much rather they customised each version to make the most of each console. eg. Shinier graphics and achievements on 360, Home trophies and more parallelism on PS3 (more pedestrians, cars, etc).
      IMO: exclusive > timed exclusive > x-platform. If you have an exclusive game, it's almost guaranteed to be optimised for that platform. Same with timed exclusives (Oblivion & NG:S = case-in-point). With simultaneous releases you just know the games are going to lose the uniqueness which defines what each console is capable of.
    • Exhaust, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1@Catharz

      Hahahaha. WAAAAAH! So your PS3 doesn't get exclusive content so you're refusing to by one of the best games to come out this year.... You're such a whiny little child.

      BTW. Sony could have did this as well but they were asleep at the wheel. It's been reported that they lost a lot of third party exclusives because they waited to long to engage the developers. So don't play the game it'll be your loss and only your loss.
  • Hellomoto, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1I bet that is pocket money for Bill. The man is loaded.
  • StevenFletcher, on 10/11/2007, -3/+4Reading these comments are interesting... two thoughts:

    1. Do none of you guys have jobs? When my company (large tech company in the Valley) does aggressive maneuvers to position ourselves in the market I love it. I don't see it as a negative practice- our bottom line affects my pay and my stock. Our company specifically targets and destroys competitors so I'm not offended/surprised when others do the same.

    2. Do none of you guys have jobs? I've sat in meetings with the MBA-laden top brass- a lot of times they have no more clue than the average digg poster. Most everyone is qualified to play armchair quarterback. This is especially true against marketing decisions... everyone knows marketing guys are dumb :)
    • catharz, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Actually, I run a business (on my 2nd one, actually).

      There are ways of doing business and ways of doing business. Despite Bill giving buckets of cash to charity, I still consider him a morally bankrupt monopolistic *****. I hate his company and make a point of not buying anything with Microsoft printed on it and also make a point of recommending products from his competitors (most of which are cheaper and/or better anyway).
    • Exhaust, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1@Catharz

      You're starting a second company? Must be hard work being so nice to your competitors.
  • charityjustice, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1You missed one....

    3. Do none of you guys have jobs?

    Dunno how you could leave that out.
  • reticulate, on 10/11/2007, -3/+3Ladies and Gentlemen, when people say Microsoft can play the spending game and win, this is what they mean.

    Pretty incredible stuff.
  • mywhitenoise, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3How much of a profit is this game going to make!? Holy *****.
    • RiotActing, on 11/11/2007, -4/+5Well considering that GTA:SA is one of the highest selling games of all time I think IV is going to sell just as much. 50 million is nothing to Microsoft.

      Market Cap for Microsoft 291.69 BILLION

      Market Cap for Sony 54.64 BILLION

      This holiday season will decide this console war and Microsoft just shored up another reason why one should buy a 360 instead of a PS3... good move MS.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 81 of 81 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.