@metallicorphan: Agreed. The first was epic. I thought that game would never end, but when it did, it was one of the only time I really did become emotional. I....was....bummed.
@metallicorphan: Same here. All the others are just I dunno. It's been years since I played the first but still have fond memories and hmm wonder if we'll be offed by someone related to Tommy.
I absolutely loved the first one.. but I have a horrible, horrible fear of the ocean. The first game was fine -- you were inside the establishment for the entirety of the game.. but hearing about having to fight a giant squid (probably fake, but still) and walking around in the ocean.... *shudder*
I hope these games have features and performance for PC gamers. Wolfenstein, GTAIV (still love it) to name a couple, don't even support full screen AntiAliasing! It's getting a bit out of hand. That being said, I sure hope these games rock, and Max Payne, with all the character changes still excites me. If they're good, better late than never.
Just make sure there are lot's of video options boy's!!
All these Q1 2010 delays are nuts. So much for the January - April lull. We've got quality gaming now stretching from August (Batman first out the gate!) to a few months into next year.
@thesircuddles: Could it be that publishers have finally understood that gaming isn't strictly an Autumn activity?
Or maybe they're sick of having their games thoroughly ignored until they hit the bargain bin 3 months later, and would rather sell them for $60 than 25.
@Antiterra: I always wondered how long it would take developers to clue into that concept, looks like 2009 was the answer.
It's true that sales will be different in Q1 '10 instead of Christmas season, but when you consider all the factors (other, bigger games, normal after-Christmas drought, extra polish time, etc) it probably works out for the best. I'm guessing they agree with that, or maybe the games just simply won't be done until Q1 '10.
Either way 6 months+ of quality releases sounds good to me. Maybe this process will repeat next year, but be amplified, leading to an entire year of monthly AAA releases?
@thesircuddles: That would be fantastic, except for the possible saturation of the video game market. It hasn't happened yet this gen, and yes....one can dream ;)
@thesircuddles: One has to wonder if they clued into this or if it's really just a net result from coming back from a lousy economic year; I know that, while I'm not in dire econimic straits or anything, I have to be choosier this year with games I want vs. Games I rent then I was last year and that many titles that I should consider first day buys are being put off for me this holiday (it does not help that a friend is getting married, a giant money sink, but oh well). Lots of people are going into this holiday season with a sort of cautious dread. It's going to be hell for a couple of the smaller guys. (Which I suspect will be titles like Borderlands, Scribblenauts and Champions online, though heavy is my heart when I say that), and it seems to me that a lot of companies are not taking any chances trying to play the lottery that is the holiday game release schedule.
Either way though, it's better for the consumer in the long run. Having to put an experiment like Borderlands up against solid competitors like L4D2, the new uncharted, Dragon Age: Origins and ODST is bad enough, throw in Starcraft 2 (delayed) ME 2 (March-ish), Bioshock's sequel? (Though I'm on the fence about it is as is). Put bluntly, there are a LOT of titles that I'd normally pour money into that are screwed.
Luckily for Scribblenauts, my wife won't let me avoid buying it and I, as a gamer, can not turn my nose at a neat idea. :P
First off all, Strauss should be trying to sell the company off if that's his primary goal. The sheer amount of cash generated by it for himself would far outweight any 'pocketing of extra cash'. If he wanted money, he would have sold to EA.
Second, in terms of increasing management compenstation, while true, he also increased middle and lower level compenstation as a counter balance to a worry of EA attempting a forceful take over. A valid move at the time and one critics actively praised him for doing.
Third, and perhaps most importantly, Stauss doesn't want to be bought out. Every move he makes has said that he does not want to be bought out. Hell, They've actively looked for companies for THEM to take over. Stauss does not want Take-Two to be selle, he wants to turn Take-Two into the buyer. What better legacy could be bring to TT then to take them to the mountain and stand shoulder to shoulder with EA and Activision.
Call it ego, or a solid business tactic. But of course, this pisses off shareholders. Share holders want TT to be bought out to get triple value for there shares. Author of this Perry H. Rod is a share holder. It is in his very best interest to want that triple windfall on his shares.
Hell read the follow up to a comment of his "http://www.marketrap.com/message/view_board_message/425/re-strauss-zelnick-take-twos-chairman-from-hell"
It reads more like a forum post then an intelligent response from a wallstreet trader.
TLDR: He's a trader bitching at a company he owns because he didn't get his money.
@huginn is not an emo pink kitty: It is important to remember that Strauss has a fiduciary duty to his shareholders. While his actions may not rise to a dereliction of those duties, they certainly call his competence into question. Shareholders don't like it when CEOs make them lose money. This, in turn, lowers the stock price and reduces the capital of the company. The bottom line is, Strauss isn't doing his job well.
@LedRush: While he has that duty to create value for his shareholder, his vision was to create value through internal growth and occurring new companies. His actions speak that his tactic, for ego or just his choice, through not being bought out.
Of course, this is 2 years later and TT has not picked up any new studios directly and shown double negative p/e growth. It looks like this was a poor choice by Strauss, and might have very well been, but to knock on him on what very well was a sound move at the time and bitch on him for not taking the 40-50 a share deal 2 years ago verse being at ~9 a share today (in a down economy no less)
Hell I'll buy 100 shares right now if it would shut this whiny OP up.
The simpler side of me just remains pleased he didn't sell out. But his duty to the investor was to take 3 times the value of the company and run. So if I were an investor, I'd jeer. As a gamer, I instead cheer Zelnick and his massive, massive pipes and barrel chest.
@syrax: No they don't, Maxis are too busy counting the money from over 100million sales.
@Ralavik: You can't just say no unfortunately. You have to do financial assessments of both yourself and the potential take over company, you have to provide reams of information to the FCC...bureaucracy is as expensive as it is to spell...I think I got it right...
@Ralavik: You don't have to spend money to become President, either. If everyone just decided to vote for you, then that's that. But it's a lot easier if you have a campaign. The principle is the same.
Likewise, things like special meetings cost money to arrange.
I am more concerned about the long term outlook for both companies, rather than just looking at what has happened for the past three or four quarters.
Cuts will happen everywhere. No industry or line of work is exempt from this ongoing trend. But the questions I have are:
1. What steps are taking place to prevent layoffs?
2. How aggressively are you pushing your product lines?
3. What is the profit margin and how consistant are they?
4. What are the liabilities and will it help/hurt the bottom line down the road?
5. What are the strategies being used by the corporate officers? Are they met with applause or skepticism?
6. What are the public opinion of the products? What are the public opinion of the companies and subsidiaries?
In a time of financial strife, the last thing I'd want to stick with is the "here and now" mentality, when "long term" is has proven a more sound strategy. While both are strong companies, it boils down to which strategy you're more comfortable with to decide if it's worth investing in those companies; be it ERTS, TTWO, or Joe Snuffy's Icicle Pop Stand.
ERTS has more capital, but my money (literally) is on TTWO.
Soldier_CLE says DON'T STOP AT THE STAR! REVOKE THE WHOLE DAMN THING, OWEN!!! was starred
Soldier_CLE says DON'T STOP AT THE STAR! REVOKE THE WHOLE DAMN THING, OWEN!!! was unstarred
well im just happy EA didn't take over take two, cause you know they would put out one more good GTA and one more good Midnight Club and then it would be generic and not expand on its formula. thank you take two for keeping your IP's your IP's and not getting eatin up by the corporate giant that is EA.
@EVILSTUART: I thought Take2 was already putting out the generic GTA and Midnight Clubs? Seriously, has GTA gameplay evolved a bit since 3? Like a fool, I keep buying them hoping that the game will evolve but I am always disappointed.
GTA4 on the surface looks great, but there are no consequences to your actions. If they wanted to really evolve the series, they could have put in an economy system, where there is a finite number of cars and the money you earn would be useful. Also, make the citizens recognize you and run screaming if you walk down the street with a gun out.
EA wouldn't have helped any, but T2 is doing a great job milking the same gameplay mechanics over and over.
09/01/09
So much for striking a balance all year long.
09/01/09
09/01/09
09/01/09
09/01/09
I absolutely loved the first one.. but I have a horrible, horrible fear of the ocean. The first game was fine -- you were inside the establishment for the entirety of the game.. but hearing about having to fight a giant squid (probably fake, but still) and walking around in the ocean.... *shudder*
09/01/09
Probably a fake squid?
How could it be a real one?
09/01/09
09/01/09
I meant the rumor about the giant squid boss was probably fake. :P
09/01/09
Yep...Think I got that. XD
09/01/09
Just make sure there are lot's of video options boy's!!
09/01/09
I kinda like it.
09/01/09
Or maybe they're sick of having their games thoroughly ignored until they hit the bargain bin 3 months later, and would rather sell them for $60 than 25.
Whatever it is, I kinda like it, too.
09/01/09
It's true that sales will be different in Q1 '10 instead of Christmas season, but when you consider all the factors (other, bigger games, normal after-Christmas drought, extra polish time, etc) it probably works out for the best. I'm guessing they agree with that, or maybe the games just simply won't be done until Q1 '10.
Either way 6 months+ of quality releases sounds good to me. Maybe this process will repeat next year, but be amplified, leading to an entire year of monthly AAA releases?
Well, one can dream.
09/01/09
09/01/09
Either way though, it's better for the consumer in the long run. Having to put an experiment like Borderlands up against solid competitors like L4D2, the new uncharted, Dragon Age: Origins and ODST is bad enough, throw in Starcraft 2 (delayed) ME 2 (March-ish), Bioshock's sequel? (Though I'm on the fence about it is as is). Put bluntly, there are a LOT of titles that I'd normally pour money into that are screwed.
Luckily for Scribblenauts, my wife won't let me avoid buying it and I, as a gamer, can not turn my nose at a neat idea. :P
09/01/09
Ah well. I'll pick Bioshock 2 up used later on in the year when there's not much else to play.
07/22/09
First off all, Strauss should be trying to sell the company off if that's his primary goal. The sheer amount of cash generated by it for himself would far outweight any 'pocketing of extra cash'. If he wanted money, he would have sold to EA.
Second, in terms of increasing management compenstation, while true, he also increased middle and lower level compenstation as a counter balance to a worry of EA attempting a forceful take over. A valid move at the time and one critics actively praised him for doing.
Third, and perhaps most importantly, Stauss doesn't want to be bought out. Every move he makes has said that he does not want to be bought out. Hell, They've actively looked for companies for THEM to take over. Stauss does not want Take-Two to be selle, he wants to turn Take-Two into the buyer. What better legacy could be bring to TT then to take them to the mountain and stand shoulder to shoulder with EA and Activision.
Call it ego, or a solid business tactic. But of course, this pisses off shareholders. Share holders want TT to be bought out to get triple value for there shares. Author of this Perry H. Rod is a share holder. It is in his very best interest to want that triple windfall on his shares.
Hell read the follow up to a comment of his "http://www.marketrap.com/message/view_board_message/425/re-strauss-zelnick-take-twos-chairman-from-hell"
It reads more like a forum post then an intelligent response from a wallstreet trader.
TLDR: He's a trader bitching at a company he owns because he didn't get his money.
07/22/09
07/22/09
Of course, this is 2 years later and TT has not picked up any new studios directly and shown double negative p/e growth. It looks like this was a poor choice by Strauss, and might have very well been, but to knock on him on what very well was a sound move at the time and bitch on him for not taking the 40-50 a share deal 2 years ago verse being at ~9 a share today (in a down economy no less)
Hell I'll buy 100 shares right now if it would shut this whiny OP up.
07/22/09
07/22/09
12/22/08
12/22/08
12/22/08
12/22/08
12/22/08
12/22/08
@Ralavik: You can't just say no unfortunately. You have to do financial assessments of both yourself and the potential take over company, you have to provide reams of information to the FCC...bureaucracy is as expensive as it is to spell...I think I got it right...
12/22/08
Likewise, things like special meetings cost money to arrange.
12/22/08
12/22/08
Cuts will happen everywhere. No industry or line of work is exempt from this ongoing trend. But the questions I have are:
1. What steps are taking place to prevent layoffs?
2. How aggressively are you pushing your product lines?
3. What is the profit margin and how consistant are they?
4. What are the liabilities and will it help/hurt the bottom line down the road?
5. What are the strategies being used by the corporate officers? Are they met with applause or skepticism?
6. What are the public opinion of the products? What are the public opinion of the companies and subsidiaries?
In a time of financial strife, the last thing I'd want to stick with is the "here and now" mentality, when "long term" is has proven a more sound strategy. While both are strong companies, it boils down to which strategy you're more comfortable with to decide if it's worth investing in those companies; be it ERTS, TTWO, or Joe Snuffy's Icicle Pop Stand.
ERTS has more capital, but my money (literally) is on TTWO.
12/22/08
12/22/08
GTA4 on the surface looks great, but there are no consequences to your actions. If they wanted to really evolve the series, they could have put in an economy system, where there is a finite number of cars and the money you earn would be useful. Also, make the citizens recognize you and run screaming if you walk down the street with a gun out.
EA wouldn't have helped any, but T2 is doing a great job milking the same gameplay mechanics over and over.
12/22/08
12/22/08
12/22/08
12/22/08
12/22/08
12/22/08