Rockstar's Road To Ruin

Via GamePolitics, an exerpt from an upcoming Wired print magazine article on Rockstar's slide from grace. The article outlines a number of the problems we've discussed here on the site, such as their numerous lawsuits, the 'Hot Coffee' scandal, and stock-option problems. At four pages it's only a teaser for the longer article in the magazine, but it's still very much worth taking a look. "The irony is thick: The company that defined virtual criminality is now associated with the real thing. Rockstar and Take-Two executives declined to answer questions for this article, but their rich and troubled story is revealed by official documents and former employees. It seems the blokes forgot that in life, as in Grand Theft Auto, there are repercussions for the choices you make."

Road to ruin?

[syrion]

As far as I am aware, Rockstar still makes blockbuster games which afford them a healthy income. How, precisely, does this constitute "ruin?"

Funny thing is...

[hrrY]

I don't know of many game dev house's that have succeeded in creating a game that can combine aspects of multiple genre's(racing, rpg, action, 3D 3rd person, sex) into 1 game seamlessly and have it be fun at the same time(see universal combat for reference about that approach failing)So whatevs, there problems are mostly based around their success(s)in that regard and that's what sell games. What's going on with them is a reflection how our society treats things that are successful against the better wishes of those who dictate the status quo.

Blah.

[MeanderingMind]

I wouldn't care if Rockstar lived or died, except that Jack Thompson would take the latter as a personal victory no matter the circumstances.

Re:Road to ruin?

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the writer just chose the phrase "road to ruin" for the dramatic/alliterative effect. The article itself is more evenhanded, and does not imply the company is totally stuffed just yet.

And for the record, Take-Two didn't make a healthy income in 2006, they lost over 100 million dollars (though one suspects they'll likely make it back in spades when GTA IV is released).

Re:Road to ruin?

[PingSpike]

I was thinking the same thing. For all their controversy, it seems like they're doing fine.

Plus, all that stink over hot coffee and the like probably made a lot of people want their games even more. The forbidden fruit always tastes sweeter.

Too soon to call

[Belgand]

I think this is well before the time that anyone can say Rockstar has failed. Since the Hot Coffee controversy they haven't released any really high-end games. Sure there have been a few titles, but mainly just portable GTA3 spin-offs and other properties that aren't nearly as hot. Bully, their last controversial title, didn't make much of a splash when it finally arrived. It received generally above-average reviews (and is on my personal wishlist still), but the brewing complaints from the usual groups seem to have backed off.

If GTA4 comes out and does poorly then there will be the argument that Rockstar is losing it, but otherwise... well, it's pretty heavily anticipated.

I just saw the trailer for GTA IV

[Jeppe Salvesen]

.. and whatever they have done in the past: If the gameplay is as good as the trailer, then they'll become the new Google with unlimited money so that they can buy all the lawfirms and all the judges in the world!!!!

Result, not a cause...

[PhoenixOne]

Beware of putting the cart in front of the horse.

These people had "colorful" pasts to begin with, creating and selling video games about criminality didn't make them more criminal. More likely, they picked a topic they understood and/or admired.

Same thing with video game players. Look at the past of any crazy kid that shoots up a school. They didn't start with violent video games, more likely they had abusive parents, history of picking fights, violent friends, etc. These kids are obviously attracted to violent video games, but that's a result not a cause.

Video games are a long way from being the brain-washing/reprogramming tool the media makes them out to be.

Hot Cofee "Scandal"?

[nog_lorp]

I wouldn't call it the Hot Coffee "Scandal" so much as the Hot Coffee Farse. Disregarding that fact that ILLEGAL reverse engineering is required to view the Hot Coffee minigame, the original minigame itself contains NO NUDITY. If clothed people bumping into eachother should be marked 18+, kids won't be able to buy many videogames anymore. Nudity is acheived by editing the models as well as enabling the minigame in the first place. Saying RockStar is somehow at fault here means every software/game publisher ever is just as liabe - you can add pornography to anything. The whole deal is stupid for so many other reasons as well - horrific violence is ok but small amounts of sex isn't? What the fuck. How many people do you expect to beat to death with a baseball bat in your life? Now compare that to how many people you expect to have sex with. Point made. Also, no "concerned parent" can whine about this. "Oh my god, with GTA:SA and unrestricted internet axis, my children can see porn!". The internet has porn, RockStar is not at fault for that either, in case you wanted to claim it was. ~nog_lorp

Re:Result, not a cause...

[moloko_synthemesc]

Video games are a long way from being the brain-washing/reprogramming tool the media makes them out to be.

More like... Video games are a long way from being the brain-washing/reprogramming tool the media became decades ago.