If you know where to look, you can find fresh rumours about GTA 6 pretty much every day. But last week, fans really took notice after Battlefield leaker Tom Henderson revealed what he'd heard about the game so far.
According to Henderson, the game shouldn't expected until 2025 at the very earliest, will possibly be set in a modern version of Vice City, and will feature a map which evolves over time in a similar fashion to Epic Games' Fortnite, complete with seasons throughout the year and adding more locations over time.
Henderson himself warned fans to take the info "with a pinch of salt", but now Bloomberg reporter Jason Schreier, who has broken plenty of big stories in the past, has said the details "match up with what I've heard."
In replies to fans, Schreier warned that the game is "still early in development" and indeed has an "evolving/expanding map", but he didn't seem 100% sure on the release window, other than it's clearly years away.
It certainly sounds like this information is legit, then, but it perhaps comes as a disappointment to those who were hoping GTA 6 might arrive in the next year-or-two. The gap between GTA 5 and 6 seriously could be over a decade...!
What do you make of these rumours? Give us your thoughts down in the comments below.
Comments 7
The way Rockstar are carrying on with GTA5 I wouldn't be surprised if GTA6 doesn't even come with a single player component.
Very sad times. The lure of online gaming money has ruined one of the best ever developers in my view. Beginning to think they only made Red Dead Redemption 2 in order to get that one online for the next decade as well...
So we’re potentially talking 12 years between GTAV and GTA6 😮 (2013-2025) and the only other game they released in that time period was RDR2 (which admittedly is brilliant).
Yeah if there's one company that's become a shell of its former self during the past decade, it's definitely Rockstar. It actually reminds me of a picture that was circulating around a while ago:
Definitely sad times since GTA, Red Dead, L.A. Noire etc. are such phenomenal franchises/games.
@LtSarge I get that game dev at the very top end takes a lot of time.
But Rockstar have seemingly become an experiment to see what happens if you throw the most amount of devs on a project for a protracted amount of time. Rather than making smart decisions they come up with useless features like horse bollocks that change size due to the weather that just don't add to the game.
Ultimately I don't think the games are getting better but worse. At the very least they are getting further and further apart as your graphic highlighted, which is really sad imo.
They could really do with having some internal Game Jam style competitions and seeing what much smaller teams could accomplish when pushed for time and resources.
But as long as their games continue to sell 35+ million (Red Dead 2) or 140+ Million (GTAV) + all the associated MTX/shark cards (which likely made even more money than the base games) they have little incentive to change anything.
@themightyant I think it's a bit of a Stockholm syndrome case with Red Dead 2. People adored that game but it had so many glaring issues that genuinely take you out of the experience, which people seem to just accept. It's a very slow-paced game with more unnecessary steps to do something just for the sake of realism. At the end of the day, we're playing video games, not simulators, and I don't want to come home from work in order to do more "work" in my video games.
But yes, as long as GTA Online keeps bringing in a lot of revenue, there's little point for them to make new games and I think this is the worst possible outcome for a game company. I'm certain people who work at Rockstar used to be excited to participate in new projects, e.g. the next Red Dead or the next GTA. However, now that the focus is on updating existing games, I can just imagine how underwhelming it must feel to work at a highly-regarded company as Rockstar today. Wouldn't surprise me if people start leaving the company just because nothing new or exciting is being worked on, or that it simply takes too long for something to come to fruition.
Agreed. Read Dead 2 had some great qualities. I though the story was truly excellent (though needed editing) same for voice acting, open world, graphics etc.
Yet there were so many glaring flaws. I played it solidly for about a month and then promptly forgotten about most of it. Other than the engaging tale of Arthur Morgan and friends nothing stuck with me. Almost everything else from a gameplay perspective has been done much better elsewhere. Their focus on realism is, imho, a huge trap holding them back, it just isn't fun and enjoyable.
Over 4000+ devs and 7000 credits for RDR2 and to me it's just a shame that with this amount of talent and budget THIS is what they ended up with. They push the boundaries in lots of small ways but so few that seem to truly matter.
Less then 20 devs made No Mans Sky, it's not a perfect game by a long shot but as a concept, for a small team that's impressive. What could Rockstar do if they were pushing boundaries in more interesting ways?
Or what if they were to play it much safer and do an open world but with Infamous, Crackdown, Prototype like powers and traversal (and preferably a return to humour) and do away with realism.
When GTA6 comes out (in about 5 years) I will no doubt play it, it's a cultural event within gaming, but i'm no longer excited for Rockstar games to the same extent I once was, and that is sad.
Open world games are not easy to make and they put online money over single-player DLC. If they had a GTA V or RDR 2 DLC it would soften the blow. Instead they make online content that is pay to win. And then they put all their effort towards the next whale that takes forever to develop, GTA 6.
Tap here to load 7 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...