After announcing the release of Red Dead Redemption, including its Undead Nightmare expansion, on PS4 and Switch, the $50 pricing and the non-remastered state was divisive among the fanbase. During a Take-Two earnings call following the announcement, IGN asked CEO Strauss Zelnick for clarifications about the pricing choice. “That's just what we believe is the commercially accurate price for it,” Zelnick replied.

IGN followed by asking if Undead Nightmare was the reason for its $50 price, to which Zelnick said that the expansion “was a great standalone game in its own right when it was originally released, so we feel like it's a great bundle for the first time, and certainly a great value for consumers.”

While he was vague about a potential PC release, the CEO had the following to say for the choice of a port over a remaster:

"It depends on the vision that the creative teams have for a title, and in the absence of having a powerful vision, for something that we would do with a title, we might bring it in its original form, we've done that, and in certain instances we might remaster or remake, so it really depends on the title and how the label feels about it, the platform, and what we think the opportunity is for consumers."

SOURCE

 

[YuseiFD]

"This post was meant to be satirical bro" can't just make a statement then claim it was just satire my guy. People have always batted an eye when Nintendo charges unreasonable prices for their Wii U ports. Just because you chose not to listen to the hate towards nintendo raising prices on their games doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Plus, the port doesn't even run at fucking 60fps on modern consoles. People have EVERY right to complain about this batshit port

But i hate nintendo, i never said i support either this or that, but you're literally stating the same thing, i will not buy this because i own a ps3 and have this game installed in it, why the actual F would i support a 50$ emulated crap on a life ending console.
Your post literally defended nintendo.

 

[JeepX87]

Red Dead Redemption file size is 11.4 GB for Switch version.

 

[pedro702]

Red Dead Redemption file size is 11.4 GB for Switch version.

lets just hope they use 16gb cartridge and dont cheap out and use an 8gb one and make us download the rest then ...

 

[JeepX87]

lets just hope they use 16gb cartridge and dont cheap out and use an 8gb one and make us download the rest then ...

Nintendo has capacity to force third party games to put all of data on cartridge but they didn't.

 

[pedro702]

Nintendo has capacity to force third party games to put all of data on cartridge but they didn't.

why would they force 3rd party? too loose more games on the system? sony doesnt force them neither does xbox so nintendo forcing them would be just another reason devs wouldnt make games on the switch...

xbox has alot of games where the disc has barely anything on it even halo infinite the disk from them 1st party has like 3gb of data on it... even on playstation most cod games the disc has nothing complete since infinite warfare lol.

 

[JeepX87]

why would they force 3rd party? too loose more games on the system? sony doesnt force them neither does xbox so nintendo forcing them would be just another reason devs wouldnt make games on the switch...

xbox has alot of games where the disc has barely anything on it even halo infinite the disk from them 1st party has like 3gb of data on it... even on playstation most cod games the disc has nothing complete since infinite warfare lol.

I'm just address your concern about put game on 8 GB cartridge and make customers to download, so Nintendo could require third parties to put all data to be on cartridge if they wanted but there is drawback, they could make games to be sold digitally with no physical release. If Nintendo consider this requirement, they better to discount the cartridge.

Sony and MS use blu-ray discs with fewer size variant and they are cheaper than cartridge, so not issue for third parties companies and they tend to release day one patch.

Don't hold your breath on 16 GB cartridge and Take Two is notoriously cheap, so like previous games, they put on 8 GB cartridge with mandatory download instead.

I mostly buy games digitally nowadays.

 

[Jayro]

I'd honestly love more third-party PS3/4 games ported to the Switch. I already accepted it's fate as a "port" machine anyhow. (Fuck us Wii U owners in the face, I guess...)

 

[DuoForce]

But i hate nintendo, i never said i support either this or that, but you're literally stating the same thing, i will not buy this because i own a ps3 and have this game installed in it, why the actual F would i support a 50$ emulated crap on a life ending console.
Your post literally defended nintendo.

"i never said i support either this or that"
"I don't see what's wrong either, Nintendo has been doing this since the dawn of time"
My post isn't defending Nintendo. I'm simply explaining to you that lazy expensive re-releases are not a good thing whether it comes from Rockstar OR Nintendo.

 

[YuseiFD]

"i never said i support either this or that"
"I don't see what's wrong either, Nintendo has been doing this since the dawn of time"
My post isn't defending Nintendo. I'm simply explaining to you that lazy expensive re-releases are not a good thing whether it comes from Rockstar OR Nintendo.

You are defending them, i still don't see what's wrong with selling your product at the price you wish for, do i look like take two's ceo to you, if you don't like the price, don't buy it, i ain't either. It's their product, they have the right to put a price tag of a billion dollars, you don't have a say in thing, it's YOUR opinion, that's it. You can't do anything about it, people are gonna buy it, because there is na entire company who's hardware is two generations behind, yet they're thriving, do you think a shitty port isn't gonna sell that great just because it's lazy ? Good luck then

 

[Jayinem]

Why haven't they put GTA 5 on Switch? It was a PS3/Xbox 360 game from 2013.

 

[YoureALoser]

i'll be surprised if they rework it to be 60 since they didn't even make the X enhanced version on the xbox 60fps

R* has nothing what so ever to do with the enhanced version, that is all Microsoft. Microsoft has nothing to do with the port, nor does R*. Your comment is completely irrelevant to the conversation.

Post automatically merged: Aug 12, 2023

Rockstar doesn’t have a good track record with performance on the Switch, the thing barely runs GTA Trilogy and those are PS2-era. Now, admittedly, they’re also “remasters” and they ran like crap on just about everything, but that’s kind of the point here - not the best ports as of late.

Wrong. R* doesn't even have a track record with performance on switch. R* has not developed a single game for the Switch. R* has not ported a single game to the Switch. R* has had nothing what so ever to do with the Switch. R* does not make decisions, Take Two does. R* is to big to be bothered with supporting a child's handheld running decade old hardware.

 

[Latiodile]

R* has nothing what so ever to do with the enhanced version, that is all Microsoft. Microsoft has nothing to do with the port, nor does R*. Your comment is completely irrelevant to the conversation.

you're right, it isn't a remaster, there's no reason for it to be 60fps even if rockstar is entirely uninvolved

your comments are irrelevant to the discussion you replied to, untangle your panties before you try to get hostile for no reason.

 

[DuoForce]

You are defending them, i still don't see what's wrong with selling your product at the price you wish for, do i look like take two's ceo to you, if you don't like the price, don't buy it, i ain't either. It's their product, they have the right to put a price tag of a billion dollars, you don't have a say in thing, it's YOUR opinion, that's it. You can't do anything about it, people are gonna buy it, because there is na entire company who's hardware is two generations behind, yet they're thriving, do you think a shitty port isn't gonna sell that great just because it's lazy ? Good luck then

Once again, I am not defending either side. Both are shitty for overpricing their games. What's ironic is your entire post is defending Rockstar and Nintendo for overpricing their games.

 

[Foxi4]

R* has nothing what so ever to do with the enhanced version, that is all Microsoft. Microsoft has nothing to do with the port, nor does R*. Your comment is completely irrelevant to the conversation.

Post automatically merged: Aug 12, 2023

Wrong. R* doesn't even have a track record with performance on switch. R* has not developed a single game for the Switch. R* has not ported a single game to the Switch. R* has had nothing what so ever to do with the Switch. R* does not make decisions, Take Two does. R* is to big to be bothered with supporting a child's handheld running decade old hardware.

Rockstar is the publisher of the trilogy. They have *everything* to do with it. They’re as much responsible for what products get their name stamped on them as any other publisher.

 

[Spider_Man]

guys guys guys remember, the price tag will be based on forcasted sales/costs, so when it launches on the switch, and like any other third party title that fails to meet its forcasted sales (because Nintendo NEVER support third parties by advertising games other than their own shit recycled shit).

so the overall cost to recycle this game is going to cover the loss no thanks to the nintendo switch, likely why no remaster is because the switch fucking sucks dogs arses and will just get the PS3/360 version anyways, so might as well just port the game.

If it were to come to XBX as well as the PS4 then maybe a remaster might have been done, but if you take Alan Wake as an example, the switch woudlnt get it, it looks absolutely shit and worse that its original, ive played games in 720, the fucking switch is far from it, blurry as fuck....

 

[YuseiFD]

Ab

Once again, I am not defending either side. Both are shitty for overpricing their games. What's ironic is your entire post is defending Rockstar and Nintendo for overpricing their games.

Absolutely not, maybe it's my way of expressing my opinion, but i am not defending either, i understand their point, but i ain't defending a company trying to resell the same product for the price of a new one, at one point i would've liked this to continue, but it seems that they are greedy to the point that they want to enlarge their margin of profit rather than their costs for hiring more competent devs.

I always believed the more money a company gets, the more they invest in their future products, but alas...

 

[Foxi4]

But they aren't rereleasing it to xbox, the reason is because it's not on other consoles, your reply is far more pointless as you're just literally citing what i said, why would i get an entirely new console to play a delisted game. Again, it's free through emulation, it's legal through purchasing the game and it's original console, which you can get for the same price as this announced 50$.

So it’s a port, and doesn’t warrant the full retail price tag of a brand new title - this was my only point of contention, the price. If they want customers to pay more, I expect to get more in return - the game should be remastered to some degree to warrant it. It appears that the UK distributor agrees with me on this since rather than going for the usual “$1=£1” unfavourable conversion rate, the game was priced £39.99 in the UK, not £49.99.

https://www.game.co.uk/en/red-dead-redemption-2919035

This changes my calculus somewhat, since they went for the actual USD-GBP exchange rate, as opposed to the usual “fleecing” standard. I do consider that to be cheaper than average, and might actually end up picking it up, if only to avoid disc shuffling on my part. We’ll see. I want to see the performance - if it looks and plays worse than the XB1-enhanced version then there’s less than no point in spending money for a worse experience.

 

[Marc_LFD]

Why haven't they put GTA 5 on Switch? It was a PS3/Xbox 360 game from 2013.

PS3:

Base Game - 17.20 GB
Game Install - 8.28 GB
Update - 2.02 GB

So about 27.50 GB (without the DLC). It's not that big of a game in this day and age, but for the Switch? The base game would even have to be partially downloaded, not to mention the rest of it too (Install/Update).

Moreover, the Switch is now on its last year more or less so there's not too much incentive for Rockstar to port it to the Switch, maybe the next Nintendo console and then call it "next-gen port". lol

 

[YuseiFD]

So it’s a port, and doesn’t warrant the full retail price tag of a brand new title - this was my only point of contention, the price. If they want customers to pay more, I expect to get more in return - the game should be remastered to some degree to warrant it. It appears that the UK distributor agrees with me on this since rather than going for the usual “$1=£1” unfavourable conversion rate, the game was priced £39.99 in the UK, not £49.99.

https://www.game.co.uk/en/red-dead-redemption-2919035

This changes my calculus somewhat, since they went for the actual USD-GBP exchange rate, as opposed to the usual “fleecing” standard. I do consider that to be cheaper than average, and might actually end up picking it up, if only to avoid disc shuffling on my part. We’ll see. I want to see the performance - if it looks and plays worse than the XB1-enhanced version then there’s less than no point in spending money for a worse experience.

I couldn't agree more, the price is bad, this isn't a remake, this isn't a remaster, this isn't an improvement over the original release, this is the same game in an emulation wrapper for optimizing usage on new consoles.

I hate the situation but i won't complain as i don't care, as i cited before, this is their lazy product, they can put whatever price tag they won't, no body is forced to buy it.

 

[Marc_LFD]

So it’s a port, and doesn’t warrant the full retail price tag of a brand new title - this was my only point of contention, the price. If they want customers to pay more, I expect to get more in return - the game should be remastered to some degree to warrant it. It appears that the UK distributor agrees with me on this since rather than going for the usual “$1=£1” unfavourable conversion rate, the game was priced £39.99 in the UK, not £49.99.

https://www.game.co.uk/en/red-dead-redemption-2919035

This changes my calculus somewhat, since they went for the actual USD-GBP exchange rate, as opposed to the usual “fleecing” standard. I do consider that to be cheaper than average, and might actually end up picking it up, if only to avoid disc shuffling on my part. We’ll see. I want to see the performance - if it looks and plays worse than the XB1-enhanced version then there’s less than no point in spending money for a worse experience.

Ugh, GAME? That's the U.K.'s most overpriced game store there is. You'd be better off using Amazon for an MSRP.

However, in this case their pricing is correct as Amazon shows the same price: B0CFB8XRR6 (it doesn't show on GBATemp for some reason so I'll just leave that reference)

This'll probably still sell millions, but it's obviously overpriced. $14.99-24.99 would have been a more sensible price for a port. Rockstar copying Nintendo's tactics on selling old games overpriced.