Menu Close

Take-Two Rakes In $1.27 Billion, GTAV The Driving Force

It was bound to happen.

After delaying their earnings report for a day, publisher Take-Two Interactive has finally stepped up and delivered their record-breaking results.

Thanks in large part to the acclaimed Bioshock Infinite and Grand Theft Auto V , Take-Two reported a non-GAAP revenue of $1.27 billion and slightly increased their projections for the remainder of the fiscal year, from $2.2 billion to $2.3 billion.

After GTAV led all software sales in the September NPD report, Take Two confirmed that the blockbuster has sold "nearly 29 million units, exceeding the lifetime sell-in of GTAIV on consoles in less than six weeks after launch." That number does involve copies sold to retailers and not to consumers but even so, the company believes GTAV sales will continue to be strong throughout the next financial quarter.

Take-Two also cited over $118 million from strong catalog sales of GTAV, Borderlands 2 , Civilization V , Red Dead Redemption and NBA 2K13 . Downloadable content for those games, as well as Bioshock Infinite generated another $105.5 million. For the future, Take-Two has "ten unique titles planned for next-generation consoles, including multiple releases slated for fiscal 2015."

Break out the champagne!

Take-Two Enjoys “Better-Than-Expected” First-Quarter Results

Yes, the digital era is essentially upon us. Get used to it.

Take-Two Interactive's quarterly results aren't too shabby, and it's due in large part to booming digital sales. The reported earnings for the period ending June 30 shows a 128% year-over-year growth in digitally delivered content, which ultimately accounted for over half (52%) of the total net revenue.

It also helped that the critically acclaimed Bioshock Infinite shipped 4 million copies and is expected to become the best-selling title in the vaunted franchise. Borderlands 2 has shipped 7 million units to date, and Grand Theft Auto IV and NBA 2K13 continue to pull their weight. The company posted a net revenue of $144.3 million, compared to the $226.1 million it posted last year. There's an overall loss of $47.1 million but that's better than the $98.8 million loss from 2012.

The loss was partly due to a title in development at 2K Games; they've spent $29.6 million on it and we wonder what it is… It seems like quite the blockbuster. Said Take-Two CEO Strauss Zelnick:

"Our better-than-expected first quarter results demonstrate that the market remains strong for the highest-quality interactive entertainment. We continue to benefit from robust demand for our recent genre-leading releases, iconic catalog titles and growing portfolio of innovative digitally delivered offerings."

If you've forgotten, Grand Theft Auto V explodes onto the scene on September 17. Talk about a cash cow!

Take-Two Q3 Results: Net Revenue, Net Income Surge

'Twas a good Q3 for Take-Two.

Publisher Take-Two Interactive has reported their third quarter financial results for the period ending December 31, and the results are rosy:

The company posted a net revenue of $405 million, a sharp increase of 71% compared to last year, and net income surged 148% to $78.8 million.

Take-Two cited Borderlands 2 , XCOM: Enemy Unknown and NBA 2K13 as the biggest contributors to the good quarter, and catalog sales of Grand Theft Auto IV and Red Dead Redemption helped as well. In fact, catalog sales comprised 22% of the company's net revenue. As for sales/ship numbers, Borderlands 2 has passed 6 million shipped copies and NBA 2K13 has now sold over 4.5 million units. Take-Two's digital branch was up, too; revenues rose 244% and made up 23% of the net revenue. Yeah, digital just gets bigger and bigger.

As for future expectations, the publisher expects total net revenue for the fourth quarter ending March 31 to be between $235 million and $285 million, with full-year revenue totaling $1.15 billion to $1.20 billion. Bioshock Infinite and Grand Theft Auto V should be huge for Take-Two in the next fiscal year… Who's ready for those?

Newsflash, Out-Of-Touch Politicians: Not All Games Are For Kids

Saying that not all video games are for children is like saying that not all movies are for children. It's the exact same statement. It's as clear as day.

And yet, the older, out-of-touch politicians and members of the mainstream media haven't quite grasped that this is no longer 1986. The average age of a gamer in this country is now around 35 years of age; the simplest, quickest bit of research would tell you that. But unsurprisingly, the people of whom I speak are unwilling to do even that.

After the Newtown tragedy, some Senator wants the NAS to study the effects of violent games on children . …why? Why? The effects are probably not good. In fact, we know they're not good. It's the reason why video games have ratings, ratings which are very similar to the ratings the MPAA hands out to films. The ESRB has the same responsibility and in all honesty, I believe they do a much better job than the MPAA. Violent games aren't designed for children. They aren't marketed toward children. Children can't even buy them. Games in which you shoot a lot of people? Not for kids. Games where violence is vivid and realistic? Not for kids.

So why? What the hell is the point of such a bill? The statement from that Senator sounds so painfully dated, he should be embarrassed: "Major corporations, including the video game industry, make billions on marketing and selling violent content to children." No, they do not . That's just a blatantly false statement. They can't sell violent content to children; it's against the law . You remember, don't you? When all you politicians got together and got that bill passed that said video games should have ratings? By the way, that was the last time you did anything right regarding the gaming industry; I've supported that decision since the time I was young.

But what did you think the rating system was for ? If all video games are only for kids – which you clearly believe, based on that absurd statement – then what's the point of ratings? Explain that to me. No, better yet, explain to me how the words "kid" and "children" are still routinely associated with video games. Explain how you're this far gone. Nobody is marketing Call of Duty to kids. Nobody will be marketing Grand Theft Auto V to kids. No respectable retailer will sell such games to kids. No parent who has done an ounce of research will buy these games for their kids. So maybe you should opt to study something else. Anything . Anything that doesn't make you sound like a dinosaur.

Dinosaurs shouldn't be able to hold positions of power. It makes people in-the-know snicker behind their backs and roll their eyes. …and that's the only funny part of the situation.

Dear ESA, We’re Going To Need You To Define “Gamer”

For a while now, I've been reading the latest ESA results and wondering what they actually mean .

It's all sorts of interesting to say that 47% of all "gamers" are female (which, as all the avid gamers know, absolutely is not true), and that the average age of a "gamer" is 30 (which probably is true). Such numbers promote intriguing discussion. I'll go with that.

But until we get an operational definition for the term "gamer," we can't draw any conclusions from those statistics, now can we? What's the definition? Is it someone who spends a certain amount? Plays a certain amount of time? Or merely someone who, if asked, goes, "yeah, I'm a gamer"? Someone who plays a few games on Facebook or their mobile phone while waiting for a bus isn't a "gamer." That's like saying I'm a race car driver because I drove to the store yesterday.

I know the ESA wants to prove to everyone that gaming is mainstream and that it doesn't cater specifically to males anymore, and that the industry is quite obviously getting more popular with time. But if you hang around GameStop all day, you'll know the numbers are skewed. You'll know that in truth, although I am well aware that more women are playing than ever before, this is still a hobby dominated by males. So until we can understand how the ESA defined "gamer" before racking up these stats, I don't think we can say anything definitive.

Bottom line: Use common sense. Go online with a mic. Pick most any game.  Tell me what percentage of voices you hear are male. Go on any game forum or community anywhere online. See how many women are on there. GameFAQs did a poll recently asking if you were male or female, and I believe the end result was 95% male. As much as I'd love to see more women playing games on an avid basis, it just isn't happening that often.

Developer: “Nobody Buys Any FPS Not Named Call Of Duty”

Think all developers need to do is make a shooter and rake in the cash? Think again.

Co-founder and former MD of TimeSplitters developer Free Radical Software (since absorbed to become part of Crytek UK) Steve Ellis told Edge that "pretty much every FPS loses money."

Ellis also handled the multiplayer aspect of the immensely popular N64 classic GoldenEye , so he's quite familiar with the genre. Now, though, he wants to move beyond FPSs because no publisher is willing to take a risk and break free of the standard military/ Call of Duty mold. Said Ellis:

"I spent the whole of 2008 going round talking to publishers trying to sign up Timesplitters 4. There just isn't the interest there in doing anything that tries to step away from the rules of the genre – no one wants to do something that's quirky and different, because it's too much of a risk. And a large part of that is the cost of doing it.

Nobody really buys any FPSes unless they're called Call Of Duty. I guess Battlefield did okay, but aside from that pretty much every FPS loses money. I mean, [look at] Crysis 2: great game, but there's no way it came anywhere close to recouping its dev costs."

That's an interesting comment concerning Crysis 2 , which was critically revered and sold pretty well, and Crysis 3 has been confirmed for 2013. So maybe it's not entirely true that every single shooter not entitled "Call of Duty" loses out. That being said, Ellis' statements are still bound to turn heads throughout the industry.