Current Events > Just dawned on me why GTA doesn't have licensed cars

(+) Yeah! (+)

brands wouldn't like to see their cars on a game about carjacking

Not sure if it has changed but car brands dont like seeing their cars damaged either. At least that was why Gran turismo didnt have damage

Also screenshots of their car on fire sounded unappealing

I think the main reason is so they wouldn't have to de-list the game after 3 years when the licence expired.

josifrees posted...

Not sure if it has changed but car brands dont like seeing their cars damaged either. At least that was why Gran turismo didnt have damage

Actually, this is something they says, but wasn't actually true (ie other games had the same cars as GT but they did have damage).

reminds me of Apple(?), where they don't want their products being shown in a bad light.

Some of them are pretty damn close enough that I'm surprised they haven't been sued. I guess as long as the tail lights or whatever are different enough it can skirt by.

DarkDoc posted...

I think the main reason is so they wouldn't have to de-list the game after 3 years when the licence expired.

Good point. It's bad enough when the older games have music removed due to that.

DarkDoc posted...

I think the main reason is so they wouldn't have to de-list the game after 3 years when the licence expired.

Uh...no? Delisting wasn't even a concept until after GTA4. And if that were the issue, then they wouldn't do copyrighted music either.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Imagine if they licensed Ferrari, they couldn't have the player destroy the car, the car couldn't be repainted, you would be sent to the abyss if you tried to jump on it, the logo would never be subject to damage even if visible damage could be enabled and you could only drive it if you were well groomed and dressed in a suit with a 919.
pokedude900 posted...

Uh...no? Delisting wasn't even a concept until after GTA4. And if that were the issue, then they wouldn't do copyrighted music either.

Rockstar is known for removing expired music licenses from the radio through updates and releases. Those aren't critical either so imagine if they lost the license to all their cars at once.

R* didn't have the money to license actual brands when they made the very first game. By the time they were swimming in cash from the third installment, they already made a bunch of their own parody brands.

DarkDoc posted...

I think the main reason is so they wouldn't have to de-list the game after 3 years when the licence expired.

Why does everyone keep forgetting GTA was a thing long before digital downloads or even GTA3?

This wasnt a deal in the past so much, but for many years now many top brand car companies wont license their cars to any game that has a scratches, denting or damaging of cars. They only want their cars shown shiny, new and perfect 100% of the time as like its a selling point.
its dumb

I reckon the whole "showing the car used to murder countless pedestrians" would be more of a concern for the brand than showing the car getting scratched.

Not that I imagine Rockstar ever seriously considered chasing real brands; having parodies fits the ethos of the franchise a lot more.

DarkDoc posted...

I think the main reason is so they wouldn't have to de-list the game after 3 years when the licence expired.

Actually, this is something they says, but wasn't actually true (ie other games had the same cars as GT but they did have damage).

iirc you can pay more and show damage and GT didnt want to pay. Have to remember this was also 25 years ago and things have changed

Mario Kart has Mercedes cars

Tropicalwood posted...

Rockstar is known for removing expired music licenses from the radio through updates and releases. Those aren't critical either so imagine if they lost the license to all their cars at once.

Why would R* suddenly lose the licensing to use cars all at once? That never happened with the music.

Given GTA Online's target demographic and presentation, modern Rockstar would froth at the mouth to have licensed cars in the GTA universe.

josifrees posted...

iirc you can pay more and show damage and GT didnt want to pay. Have to remember this was also 25 years ago and things have changed

Even today I don't think the Ferraris in GT7 have visible damage enabled even though just about every other brand does.

josifrees posted...

Not sure if it has changed but car brands dont like seeing their cars damaged either. At least that was why Gran turismo didnt have damage

And yet there are plenty of games with licensed cars AND damage. I guess it depends on how much damage?

The past: "It is totally unrealistic that all these car doors are just unlocked!"

Now of days: *Person with a USB* *Opens the car door*

TomClark posted...

I reckon the whole "showing the car used to murder countless pedestrians" would be more of a concern for the brand than showing the car getting scratched.

Not that I imagine Rockstar ever seriously considered chasing real brands; having parodies fits the ethos of the franchise a lot more.

Yeah, the satire and parody aspect is really at the heart of it, aside from cost savings. Its a fantasy world of their own making.

They even lampoon Ferraris strict brand control with some of the liveries, like with this Ferrari:
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/8/827d0bd2.jpg

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/e/ecf1642d.jpg

Aztex posted...

Mario Kart has Mercedes cars

Mercedes was a sponsor of The Lost World: Jurassic Park.

The film made sure to have them ripped apart by dinosaurs. <_<

I always thought it was funny that it uses licensed songs though because many of them reference IRL places.

Within GTA, Hollywood Nights probably sounds like nonsense.

I thought it was because of all the dick jokes.

Hayame_Zero posted...

I always thought it was funny that it uses licensed songs though because many of them reference IRL places.

Within GTA, Hollywood Nights probably sounds like nonsense.

"I hate California girls. I hate California girls."

uh, duh

At this point, nobody should be using licensed anything.

I straight up can't see myself hearing "real world cars" as a selling point in a game and not automatically going "so they're going to delist it in 2035."