Rockstar "only scratching the surface"

By Fred Dutton Published 19 October, 2011

Houser sees more potential in open-world.

Rockstar has barely scratched the surface of what's achievable in open world games, according to co-founder Dan Houser.

When asked by IGN what the future holds for the developer, Houser suggested there was still plenty more mileage left in the free-roaming Grand Theft Auto template.

"I think there's something really interesting in the open world experience," he explained.

"Obviously we've made like ten of them now and they still don't feel boring to me. It still feels that we're only scratching the surface of that potential."

Houser wouldn't offer specifics as to what Rockstar has coming up beyond the release of Max Payne 3 early next year.

"We'll hopefully have done a bunch of interesting games in the next ten years. That's always the goal. I've never been that good at the futureology side of game-making," he said.

"We never really care what the name is on the box, either. The name Grand Theft Auto, the name Max Payne, the name's Red Dead, the name's Table Tennis, it doesn't really matter as long as the game's cool.

"I would never have believed you would have been talking about this in ten years time. We were still talking about Space Invaders [10 years ago], and that was already 20, 30 years old then. Hopefully we'll continue to do interesting stuff, that's you know, that's kind of all you can hope for."

Houser was speaking to mark the 10th anniversary of Grand Theft Auto III's original release. Last week it announced the game will be released on iOS devices later this year.

Picture of Fred.

About Fred Dutton

Fred Dutton is Eurogamer's US news editor, based in Washington DC.

Read more articles from Fred by visiting the Fred Dutton archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (38) Latest comment 7 months ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • RandyKleen #1 7 months ago

    There are definitely more places to go in open world games. GTA has shown us but one avenue. A more simulation type world would be nice, maybe a space city too.

  • HurbleBurble #2 7 months ago

    So long as it doesn't involve my Eastern European cousin wanting to go and see poorly animated 'tee-teeeeeees'. I'm all for it. Dig deeper Rockstar.

  • the_dudefather #3 7 months ago

    GTA 5: Moonbase

    Just sayin'

  • cheeky_BILLY #4 7 months ago

    i reckon a swinging 60's british gangster style GTA game would be awesome.

  • waynenot #5 7 months ago

    "Obviously we've made like ten of them now and they still don't feel boring to me."

    Obviously didn't play GTAIV for very long.

  • Claudiov1.0 #6 7 months ago

    Rockstar.. really how amazing can they be? They are probably one of the best if not the best in curret gaming market... they are just simply fenomenal!!

  • albo #7 7 months ago

    chances are it'll probably be set somewhere predictable like LA, especially with the supposed rumors and leaks a while ago suggesting it will be. all i want from it wherever it's set is innovation and to have fun just like last gen gta's and portable gta's have done. gta 4 was great but mission after mission of driving somewhere, shooting drug dealers and driving back didn't make for such a fun game along with the life simulator side missions of going out with virtual friends to play bowling. liberty city was an amazing creation, the memorable charcters were great but i want that and fun gameplay back please rockstar.

  • BabyJesus #8 7 months ago

    Yawn @ gtaiv hate.

  • kimchibaka #9 7 months ago

    Could have provided the quote for the headline myself - it's patently obvious.

    Weren't 70% or so of buildings in GTAIV going to be enterable at one point? Provide that for starters, and you have still only 'scratched the surface'.

  • IncredibleKoosh #10 7 months ago

    Wouldn't mind a GTA III HD collection...
    Edited by IncredibleKoosh at 19/10/11 @ 20:24

  • Jacksie66 #11 7 months ago

    GTA HD collection? Id have me some of that in a heartbeat.....

  • Bleemo #12 7 months ago

    I wish they would go slightly smaller in terms of overall scale but more in terms of depth of their world. getting about was a pain at times in San Andreas and GTA4 but not so much in Vice City. I would also like another theme like the consensus here, sci-fi sandbox is interesting as it hasn't really been done. Medieval England would be intriguing too.

  • Ryze #13 7 months ago

    ^ Yep!

    Just add an autosave ala GTA IV, and fix those games' targeting systems (also ala GTA IV), and you've got a DEAL!

  • Cobalt_Jackal #14 7 months ago

    Hey Dan, How about you do some major PS3 optimisation for your game engine "RAGE". Because the PS3 versions of your games are often sub-HD, suffer from poor FPS, lack graphical detail/fildelity and are jaggy... blurry messes. Quite frankly its a disgrace I mean R* are one of the biggest and richest Devs/publisher out there and yet they still can't code/program on the PS3 too save their lifes, its pathetic. Its not 2007 anymore its 2011 and R* are stilll a bunch of incompetant, lazy idiot amatuers with reguards to PS3.

    I feel that if Rockstar don't improve... don't pick up their game with reguards to the PS3 version of their games then tbh i will have nothing more to do with them.

    But i digress, honestly i feel that R* games have become pretty stale, its always the same mission stcruture/formula in their open worlds (drive here, kill this guy, rinse and repeat. Or kill this guy, then a car chase and kill that guy then go home/next mission ad nosiuem). They also create these realistic living huge worlds and seemingly give us nothing too do or at least not enough things too do, and it just becomes boring fast.

    But i do belive that their is more too uncover/achieve in Sandbox/open world games. Certainly these types of games are only stratching the surface at the moment. This genre defo has more too show us but IMO its not Rockstar who will be the ones showing us... its not Rockstar who are gonna be the new innovators in the open world genre.
    Edited by Cobalt_Jackal at 19/10/11 @ 23:35

  • spekkeh #15 7 months ago

    There's lots of different avenues open world games can evolve into, but I don't agree that their games still feel fresh. Personally, I find the minimap/mission marker setup to be done to death and quite boring. This is actually the main reason I'd say there's room for improvement.

  • Shinetop #16 7 months ago

    So when are they going to start to scratch a little deeper? Because their open world games so far have been little beyond the template of "find guy" "do 20 missions for guy so he'll help you" "guy can't actually help you but can refer you to other guy who has 20 more missions". And the missions themselves are little beyond "kill lots of dudes"/"chase a dude"/some combination thereof.
    Edited by Shinetop at 19/10/11 @ 21:10

  • ShiroBen #17 7 months ago

    I still want an Amelie open world game. Run around doing nice things for random people, that's my idea of a good time.

    But generally speaking, GTAIV was a step in the wrong direction. I loved San Andreas because it was about all these things you could do--it was huge and open and varied enough that things like UFO sightings and Bigfoot seemed plausible and fun. I still remember the excitement when it first came out, tanks! Swimming! Your own airport! A flipping JETPACK! One of my favourite things to do was just grab a bike and cycle around in first-person, bugger around on the hills, go city-to-city taking in the sights. Plus the clothing options were huge, you could really make CJ feel like 'your' character.

    GTAIV, on the other hand, seemed to be about all the things you COULDN'T do--can't go inside, can't wear any cool/fun/interesting clothes because there aren't any, can't ride a bicycle because there aren't any, can't steal a tank because there aren't any. Can't even really just go nuts because the city felt so cramped and restricted, especially after San Andreas and the totally bonkers cross-country chases. Plus even the relationships weren't there--I liked the first island characters, I wanted to do more stuff with them, but after their missions they just closed off. I thought Nico and Jacob had good chemistry so I kind of wanted to see more of that, but no, off to the next island, off to do missions for idiots and jerks ... in the end, GTAIV was a linear game just pretending not to be. And there wasn't enough 'freedom' to distract me from that.

  • CaptainKid #18 7 months ago

    I just hope the next GTA will be Vice City again.
    Miami 1986.

    Bring it on!

    And no fucking dates any more please.

    And more stuff to do.

  • Ranger101 #19 7 months ago

    @bleemo - Medieval setting sounds cool! Game of Thrones style. Although Skyrim/Elder Scrolls might already have that market. Still, a Rockstar medieval game with it's budget, acting and script might still be welcome. Or change the culture, make it Chinese dynasty or Shogun Japan.

  • Bleemo #20 7 months ago

    @Ranger I was thinking more non fantasy medieval, I agree elder scrolls already does fantasy version well enough. Maybe Rome? could deffo do a good story about some young pleb who works his way up from the bottom using politics and violence in equal measure.

  • Kanjin #21 7 months ago

    Ooh, playing as a medieval scumbag wouldn't be excellent. Dying from cholera aged 38 would suck though.

  • Bleemo #22 7 months ago

    @Kanjin

    Ahhh see now you've stumbled into allowing me to show off some of my knowledge about life expectancy, (used to date female archaeolgist).

    Ahem it's kind of complicated but life expectancy was a bit dodgy in yee olden days because although the life expectancy statistically was mid 30's it didn't actually work like that for people who lived into adulthood. See the likelihood of dying between 0-6 years old was very high as your immune system was too weak.

    HOWEVER if you lived beyond that there was a reasonable chance that you would live into your 50's even as a pleb. It is just that so many people died as a kid that it throws the mean average out. For example King Rollo who founded the Norman's lived to his early 70's and although he was considered old it wasn't shockingly weird.

  • dadrester #23 7 months ago

    I really like the fact that Dan Houser, as a company exec, speaks passionately about the actual games and not just the company and sales! It seems like he's still in it for the creative endeavour (unlike everyone's love to hate figure; Bobby Kotick - Personally I can't stand Peter Moore). That and the mountains of cocaine his brother skis down.

  • funkateer #24 7 months ago

    I want an open world Blade Runner game made by Rockstar. One with a branching story where you could keep being a Blade Runner and kick some replicants' ass, or side with replicants, find out you're a replicant yourself, or find out why you're not a replicant (depending on the paths you choose and what you choose to believe). All set in this amazing futuristic decaying city where morals are all grey and even your own reality is all ambiguous.
    This ambiguity and branching story would be much more interesting and believable and a big step-up from a game like GTA4 where I just had the sense that all given freedom was great but in the context of the paper-thin story was also all utterly meaningless.

  • Cheesecake_89 #25 7 months ago

    @Bleemo who said 'Medieval England would be intriguing too.'

    I think Assassins creed deals with those old time periods perfectly. I think making it fun and funky is the way forward like Vice City. Great music, clubs, glamour.

  • CaptainQuint #26 7 months ago

    I'd too see more potential in Rockstar made games if only they "scratched the surface" of good controls and player movement.

    At the moment though those bare basics are entombed beneath tons of ego and ignorance.

  • LR100 #27 7 months ago

    Imagine an open world game where the map size is an entire continent the size of Russia, where every building can be entered and levelled to the ground. A world with millions of NPCs, missions, shops and interactive establishments such as bars and cinemas. I wonder just how much processing power and HD space you'd need for that.

  • shave_my_donkey #28 7 months ago

    i still think an open world type game set on the citadel in the ME universe would rock so fuckin hard

  • Kanjin #29 7 months ago

    @Bleemo

    And now I know!

  • darkmorgado #30 7 months ago

    I'd like a GTA game where you can actually use the airports to travel between cities, and need to in order to help protect your territory from rival gangs.

    Hell, they could include a drug smuggling mechanic.

  • darkmorgado #31 7 months ago

    GTA set in 70s/80s London please. Punks, Goths, New Romantics, and the thatcher era is absolutely ripe for some excellent rockstar satire.

  • svenjl #32 7 months ago

    Sounds like a lot of people need to go and pre-order Saints Row the 3rd. STAG, tanks, cannons, parachutes, Star Wars like speed bikes, air strikes, sex changes etc.

  • Vampyre_Warrior #33 7 months ago

    Open world is all nice and wel,l how about some more FREEDOM and things to do in the open world. While GTA 4 had some nice mini games, thats not really what an open world should be about but that doesnt mean they should be dropped. I really hope the faction hopping stops!

    Oh and ofc...
    Non-human protaganist in a Space opera setting! (Kiel ze 'umanz)
    Urban fantasy Open World a la Dresden files! (but not based on the Dresden files of course)
    GTA europe...(what do you know, there is more to the world then just the United States :o)
    Cosa Nostra (think mafia 2 cept with more shit to do beyond the main story line :o)

  • bionic #34 7 months ago

    Open world is good. But filling the location with detail appears to be an issue. Sure GTA 4 was impressive, but I gave up 62% of the way through. I probably didn't get to see half the stuff. Playing pool didn'tinterest me, the Amuzement Park didn't appear to ever open ?

    Then along came Heavy Rail, expectations were raised. Sure Heavy Rain wasn't open world, but unless they can amply Heavy Rain detail to open world, then I'm not interested.

    I've just started playing Red Dead Redemption. Its good, but due to the size of the game, its all too obvious they were required to work at a rate that would not allow for detail / polish to match that of Heavy Rain.

  • slickster #35 7 months ago

    I want to see a new Bully game please rockstar.

  • Fruit-Salad #36 7 months ago

    Post deleted at 13:34:04 08-05-2012

  • MisterM #37 7 months ago

    Rockstar do the open world better than anyone. That's just a fact. All the Just Causes, Saints Rows, etc - they just feel empty. They have plenty to do, but the personality, the charm of the worlds Rockstar create - no one else seems to get it right.

    I think this is because Rockstar spend so much time on creating character and life in their worlds, rather than sticking a bunch of 'people' in it and letting them have 'funny' stuff to say - the pedestrians of the GTA games don't just crack wise - they make calls, discuss minutae and triviality - real stuff.

    I really can't wait to see what they do next and whatever they're doing in ten years time... well, it's going to be incredible. Haters gonna hate, but haters contribute nothing to the grand scheme of things in this case.

  • Sniper_007 #38 7 months ago

    I seem to be one of the few to agree with you there bionic.

    Open world games will only be of real interest to me when they can fill them with as much character as you can a 'non open world' style of game.

    LA Noire was so enjoyable for me because it wasn't trying to be too open world - the rigid 'case style' structure allowed the depth of character and design to flourish whilst still giving you a huge playground to roam around in, 'borrow' cars, deal with street crimes, etc. For some there wasn't enough to do, but for me (with the limited time I currently have available) I loved the direction and plot which kept me driving forward. Too many distractions and I just become bored too easily, which is unfortunately why I didn't finish GTA4 and never bothered with Red Dead Redemption.

    Mass Effect is another great example of appearing to give you a universe to explore, but actually directing you in such a way that you only get a taste of everywhere but still feel satisfied because of all the little details. Sometimes less really is more?