Support NeoGAF

[MosquitoSmasher]

Rockstar successfully built off this approach with Grand Theft Auto V. By weaving the stories of three playable protagonists together, the game still benefitted from seeing the world from multiple perspectives. But why did Rockstar choose to forgo narrative expansions for Los Santos, which is easily the most fully realized open world it's ever created? Was it always its plan to move away from story expansions and instead focus on GTA Online? That's the question we posed Rockstar director of design Imran Sarwar.

"No, it was not really a conscious decision, it’s just what happened," Sarwar says. "With GTA V, the single-player game was absolutely massive and very, very complete. It was three games in one. The next-gen versions took a year of everyone’s time to get right, then the online component had a lot of potential but to come close to realizing that potential, also sucked up a lot of resources. And then there are other games – in particular Red Dead Redemption II. The combination of these three factors means for this game, we did not feel single-player expansions were either possible or necessary."

The good news for story fans? Rockstar not having the bandwidth for an expanded story campaign in GTA V doesn't mean no Rockstar games will have them going forward. "We would love to do more single-player add-ons for games in the future," Sarwar says. "As a company, we love single-player more than anything, and believe in it absolutely – for storytelling and a sense of immersion in a world, multiplayer games don’t rival single-player games."

http://www.gameinformer.com/themes/...al&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

I'm not buying it though. Sure it takes time to make that next gen version of V and GTA Online takes a bit of time too for the updates now and then and yep, RDR2 naturally. My problem with his I guess excuse is that they pretty much promised it. While GTAO was steadily going on they said on their Newswire and I think a interview as well that new stories/experiences for the three characters would be coming. There were even leaked audio files and even Franklin's voice actor teased story stuff.

They really should have never mentioned bringing SP content in the first place. Also three games in one? Yeah, nah. It was just one game where you could switch between the protagonists and it's length was about the same as RDR or slightly longer. Then saying just because SP content didn't happen for V doesn't mean RDR2 won't have it is probably because there is no guarantee yet that they can live off of RDR Online.

 

[Ultimadrago]

I'm surprised they even made a statement on this. It was responding to a question, but I expected a brief answer.

 

[Aretak]

The campaign certainly wasn't three games in one. As good as it was, length-wise it was about standard for an open world game. I was certainly left wanting more when it ended, but had zero interest in GTA Online, so just uninstalled it instead.

 

[oneils]

It makes sense to me. Priorities changed. New gen version and pc version of the game, then stabilisation of gta online, and then rdr2. Can see why single player dlc just wasn't a priority.

Doesn't mean we have to like it, but the answer makes sense.

 

[KormaChameleon]

Because GTA Online is making loads of money... That's why.

 

[br3wnor]

I was fully satisfied w/ GTA V’s single player campaign. I’d obviously had thrown money at DLC had they released it, but I got every cent of my $60 worth and can’t complain. Glad they moved onto RD2.

Because GTA Online is making loads of money... That's why.

That too, don’t really blame them on feeding from the online cash cow as opposed to investing millions into a new SP campaign.

 

[jobber]

With the way GTA 5 was paced and ultimately ended, I didn't see why you needed an expansion. It'll leave more questions than closure. You may not find out the answers until GTA 6 which wouldn't be out for 10+ years.

 

[MosquitoSmasher]

It makes sense to me. Priorities changed. New gen version and pc version of the game, then stabilisation of gta online, and then rdr2. Can see why single player dlc just wasn't a priority.

Doesn't mean we have to like it, but the answer makes sense.

It makes sense, I agree. Especially after Rockstar even said the GTA IV expansions sadly had not been profitable. They said this in a interview while GTA V had not been released yet. So they then said SP content for V wasn't guaranteed. Understandable. But after the release of the game and when GTAO had picked up steam quite a bit, I think this was even after the X1/PS4 versions, they spoke about SP content. Making people all happy and excited.

So many places in this game world remain unused for the SP. So much potential here.

 

[Humidex]

No doubt the head honchos at Take Two are really, really encouraging them to have RDR Online be the centrepiece of the game....

 

[x24hrs2livex]

Because GTA Online is making loads of money... That's why.

Exactly. GTAV was great and it should have had some single player DLC. Could have came out with 1 massive expansion and charged $40 for it.

 

[Simply Sami]

No doubt the head honchos at Take Two are really, really encouraging them to have RDR Online be the centrepiece of the game....

Oh here we go.

Dan and San Houser consider themselves Hollywood writers. As long as they around you going to get a big story and single player.

 

[shimon]

Because GTA Online is making loads of money... That's why.

This right here.

 

[MosquitoSmasher]

With the way GTA 5 was paced and ultimately ended, I didn't see why you needed an expansion. It'll leave more questions than closure. You may not find out the answers until GTA 6 which wouldn't be out for 10+ years.

There are many different ways they could have tackled this DLC. Maybe give us Franklin's younger years? That would mean a lot of the stuff we had in GTA SA. Much more time spent in the hood basically which IMO we left too early in V, I loved those parts.

And I'm sure something similar for the other two would have worked as well.

 

[Steiner84]

im not sure well see a gta6 in the spirit of the previous games.
Theyll propably announce a gta online 2 in disguise.

 

[Revolutionary]

I'm surprised they even made a statement on this. It was responding to a question, but I expected a brief answer.

Yeah, the title made me think this was another suicide thread lol

 

[MosquitoSmasher]

I remember the two IV expansions, not only did both of them bring improvements and new features they were also damn good. Especially The ballad of Gay Tony. As others have said here, it's definitely because of the money machine that is GTAO. I still firmly believe we would have had another Rockstar game by now if it hadn't been for GTAO.

If they manage to make RDR Online a similar success with shark cards and what not, we won't see SP content. I'm not gonna expect any, that's just the best way to go about it in my book.

 

[oneils]

It makes sense, I agree. Especially after Rockstar even said the GTA IV expansions sadly had not been profitable. They said this in a interview while GTA V had not been released yet. So they then said SP content for V wasn't guaranteed. Understandable. But after the release of the game and when GTAO had picked up steam quite a bit, I think this was even after the X1/PS4 versions, they spoke about SP content. Making people all happy and excited.

So many places in this game world remain unused for the SP. So much potential here.

I agree. There is tons of potential there. Even if they didnt create new campaigns, I would have gladly bought new clothes! #partoftheproblemremicrotransactions

 

[MosquitoSmasher]

I agree. There is tons of potential there. Even if they didnt create new campaigns, I would have gladly bought new clothes! #partoftheproblemremicrotransactions

Exactly. Also wasn't there recently a post about how RDR2 had been in development hell, longtime Rockstar people unhappy with how things were going (I bet the focus on GTAO)etc.

Wouldn't even surprise me if most of Rockstar wanted to make story DLC but Take Two simply said no.

Also, why not patch for Pro and One X at all? This game shines on PC and I'd love to get something similar on One X. It's just a shame.

 

[SeeThree]

I think Rockstar keeps making long singleplayer campaigns with added multiplayer until they dont.

GTA V didn't even have MP on release. They were like yo play in this world we worked on all these years for a month. Then test our multiplayer in Oct.

 

[120v]

i believe him... between the xbone/ps4 versions and RDR2 they simply never got around to it. of course GTAO was a factor but not the overriding one

 

[Madness]

Please. Online barely worked for 360 and yet they still kept content coming for online. The campaign were not any longer or special or different from san andreas or GTA IV. With that said, let's hope RDR2 is much better.

 

[ffvorax]

"With GTA V, the single-player game was absolutely massive and very, very complete. It was three games in one.

What? It didn't felt like three games to me... the fact that has three main char. doesn't make it worth 3 games...

They just didn't care to expand the SP because it was not worth it in a economic view to them... GTA online was their cash maker.

 

[PS2 Addict]

They can say all that they want... but the main reason is $$$.

 

[NoMoreTrolls]

Mmhmmm

 

[CharmingCharlie]

im not sure well see a gta6 in the spirit of the previous games.
Theyll propably announce a gta online 2 in disguise.

Yeah that is what I am expecting too. But the shocking thing is ...... well I am kinda ok with that. I never thought I would say that, I mean I am a huge GTA VC and SA fan. I love the story in Vice City and San Andreas. However GTA 5 the story didn't really click with me. I did about 1 play through of the single player story (compared to hundreds of playthroughs of VC and SA) and now I spend most of my time in GTA Online.

I wouldn't mind a scenario like Borderlands where there is a storymode you can have people co-op in. But for me personally I would rather they spent the resources on MP now.

 

[adversarial]

They definitely could have condensed that down to "Because $$$".

 

[GeoramA]

They can make up for it by making Undead Nightmare 2 for RDR2...please.

 

[Falchion]

I have no doubt they initially planned to have new story content, but once GTA Online took off and they realized how much money it was making, they just decided to scrap those plans and do more online content. Very unfortunate.

 

[joms5]

I'm not sure if I buy this.

I do believe that they maybe had so much going on that they weren't interested in doing it. But this makes it sound like they financially couldn't do it, which just isn't true.

I just wonder what they could have done to make single player DLC interesting. Would another story just do it? I'm not sure if i'd want that. TLAD and BOGT were alright for what they were, but it was just more GTA at that point.

Something like RDR:UN was great because it really did change the entire game. But zombies at that time were still fresh and making DLC with zombies at this point would just seem lazy.

I dunno. Maybe if they did a small story about prepping for the bank robbery in North Yankton. It would have been a much smaller area but at least a change in scenery would be nice.

 

[tilomite!]

I woulda paid at least $40 for a good single player DLC for GTA V. I guess there's not enough of me to be more profitable than shark cards.

 

[xviper]

it didn't get story because why would they put so much effort when they can release new events in GTA Online that would earn them MUCH more money than a SP expansion would

GTA 5 was very very complete and it's not possible to add more SP ?? really ?? what about The witcher 3 ? a VERY VERY and more VERY complete game that is PERFECTION, and yet we got 2 expansions that made it even better, Hearts of stone Expansion alone is better than GTA 5 SP, and it's a 15 hours long expansion for only 10$

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

I'm not buying it though. Sure it takes time to make that next gen version of V and GTA Online takes a bit of time too for the updates now and then and yep, RDR2 naturally. My problem with his I guess excuse is that they pretty much promised it. While GTAO was steadily going on they said on their Newswire and I think a interview as well that new stories/experiences for the three characters would be coming. There were even leaked audio files and even Franklin's voice actor teased story stuff.

They really should have never mentioned bringing SP content in the first place. Also three games in one? Yeah, nah. It was just one game where you could switch between the protagonists and it's length was about the same as RDR or slightly longer. Then saying just because SP content didn't happen for V doesn't mean RDR2 won't have it is probably because there is no guarantee yet that they can live off of RDR Online.

Rockstar also promised Agent...

Protip: don't take a dev. studios promises as gospel (they can and do change their minds often). That way you won't be disappointed.

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

it didn't get story because why would they put so much effort when they can release new events in GTA Online that would earn them MUCH more money than a SP expansion would

GTA 5 was very very complete and it's not possible to add more SP ?? really ?? what about The witcher 3 ? a VERY VERY and more VERY complete game that is PERFECTION, and yet we got 2 expansions that made it even better, Hearts of stone Expansion alone is better than GTA 5 SP, and it's a 15 hours long expansion for only 10$

Whoa there... lets not get crazy now.

 

[xviper]

Whoa there... lets not get crazy now.

lets get even more crazy, Blood and wine expansion alone is better than everything Bethesda has done, COMBINED ( with exclusion for Evil within 1)

of course that is my opinion, you are welcome to disagree

 

[NoKisum]

Calling it now: GTA 6 will be an always-online games even in its single player. Equal parts V and Online. Think Destiny's game loop structure but with more story front and center.

 

[Clockwork]

I just want to see a PS4 Pro patch for the darn game. Why hasn't this happened?

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

lets get even more crazy, Blood and wine expansion alone is better than everything Bethesda has done, COMBINED ( with exclusion for Evil within 1)

of course that is my opinion, you are welcome to disagree

Lol, this is FAAAAR less crazy than your initial statement I actually think that's a very sensible take.

 

[inner-G]

Big budget single player games are going the way of gaf

Spoiler

irrelevance

 

[xrnzaaas]

We certainly did not go for the online money and also please buy our next game RDR2 singleplayer fans!

 

[leng jai]

Saying GTAV was essentially 3 games in one is laughable.

 

[Silurus]

Bloody GTA online. That is the only reason.

 

[Caayn]

I'm not buying it. Especially after the success of GTA Online and the leaked audio files pointing towards a singleplayer DLC.

 

[Fall Into The GAF]

I'd be very surprised if there's any original SP content for GTAV after all this time. They have the capital to make it due to the revenue gleaned from GTAO's lopsided card economy, now it's just a matter of manpower to get it done. I assume all hands are on deck so to speak for RDR2, so don't expect anything until after that game is released.

Oh, and porting GTAO content onto SP doesn't count. That's a compatibility patch, not fucking content.

 

[Pankratous]

So say that as soon as it becomes clear. As soon as priorities change and the decision is made to not make SP DLC, announce it.

 

[kyser73]

it didn't get story because why would they put so much effort when they can release new events in GTA Online that would earn them MUCH more money than a SP expansion would

GTA 5 was very very complete and it's not possible to add more SP ?? really ?? what about The witcher 3 ? a VERY VERY and more VERY complete game that is PERFECTION, and yet we got 2 expansions that made it even better, Hearts of stone Expansion alone is better than GTA 5 SP, and it's a 15 hours long expansion for only 10$

I think the ‘not possible’ was in relation to resource management - he lays it out pretty clearly what they were working on.

 

[PyratRum7]

While some of these reason may be true, I honestly have a hard time believing that Rockstar didn't have enough resources to allocate to single player expansions considering the number of internal studios under the Rockstar umbrella. There is just no way that Rockstar Lincoln, Leeds, Toronto, New England, London are all working on GTA:O. These are studios that released a number of full games and ports last generation while Rockstar North gave us two full expansion to GTAIV.

Or maybe they are all working on GTA:O, in which case we're doomed...

 

[unknownhero]

I call bullshit. It's a bunch of PR speak. We all know it's for cash and to be quite honest, single player in V was pitiful. I would rather have a casino over a stock market "minigame" and a low number of quality business rather then the dozens of lame ones we got. They put way more thought into MP and it shows. MP isn't that fun either with all the grind for cash and levels.

Don't bullshit me and tell me it's free. You had to buy gta V to play multiplayer and they waved those cards in your face. I'm not preordering RDR2 and I will not buy it unless it's absolutly better than RDR in all gameplay fields.

 

[davidnolan13]

gta 5 was such a let down story wise to the point where its the only gta ive not gone back to other than vice city which i never finished but thats a different reason.
The world of 5 was great compared to the drab world of 4 but 4 had a story that got me emotionally, i was angry , sad , happy. it had characters that i still remember now. 5 had none of that and other than the main 3 i can't remember a single character.
The dlc for 4 expanded on an already great game,TBoGT was excellent and changed the tone of the game and had fun with it.

I don't play mp at all, i like story driven stuff and i really hope rdr2 isn't going to be focusing on rdr online.

 

[mckmas8808]

http://www.gameinformer.com/themes/...al&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

I'm not buying it though. Sure it takes time to make that next gen version of V and GTA Online takes a bit of time too for the updates now and then and yep, RDR2 naturally. My problem with his I guess excuse is that they pretty much promised it. While GTAO was steadily going on they said on their Newswire and I think a interview as well that new stories/experiences for the three characters would be coming. There were even leaked audio files and even Franklin's voice actor teased story stuff.

They really should have never mentioned bringing SP content in the first place. Also three games in one? Yeah, nah. It was just one game where you could switch between the protagonists and it's length was about the same as RDR or slightly longer. Then saying just because SP content didn't happen for V doesn't mean RDR2 won't have it is probably because there is no guarantee yet that they can live off of RDR Online.

How can you not buy it? The man literally gave you the reason why. No need to think he's lying.