Take-Two Interactive’s chief executive Strauss Zelnick believes game prices are exceptionally low when considering the value they offer.
In Take-Two’s Q2 Nov. 8 earnings call for 2024, Zelnick pointed out how much value players get for the “very, very low” price of each title. Despite this belief, Take-Two’s reports showcase how successful their year has been.
Take-Two made $1.44 billion in net bookings for the quarter alone, exceeding their own expectations. Not only did they succeed this quarter, but the Grand Theft Auto publishers are on track to meet their $5.55 billion goal for the entirety of the 2024 fiscal year.
Zelnick revealed GTA V’s success during the earnings call; within its 10-year lifespan, GTA V sold 190 million units and continues to “surpass expectations” alongside its GTA Online gameplay, according to the CEO.
GTA V still manages to accrue at least over 50,000 concurrent players on Steam daily and sits at number seven in the top 100 games available on the platform, as of publication. Rockstar has been consistently updating GTA V with new cosmetics, missions, and vehicles, and tackling any pesky game-ruining bugs to this day.
However, GTA isn’t the only title contributing to Take-Two’s success. Red Dead Redemption 2 sold over 57 million units since its release on Oct. 20, 2018, and thus again surpassed the company’s plans. It seems if Take-Two were to change directions and implement a new pricing strategy, they could make some serious revenue.
However, if Unity’s change in pricing is anything to go off, it might be best to weigh up all of Take-Two’s options. Unity’s last few months have been turbulent, to say the least; the game engine developers faced backlash following their pay-per-install pricing strategy, which ultimately would’ve pushed creators out of business.
Since backpedaling on their decision, Unity has revealed impending staff cuts, alongside a slew of other cost-saving measures.
Correction Nov. 19, 6:16 pm CT: This article originally suggested Strauss Zelnick believes games should be priced at an hourly rate. Those comments were instead made in response to Goldman Sachs analyst Eric James Sheridan’s question about subscription pricing in the broader media landscape. We have corrected the error.