Take-Two has announced new sales figures for its games. According to the company, Grand Theft Auto 5 has now surpassed 130 million sales on all platforms worldwide.
Furthermore, Red Dead Redemption 2 has sold 31 million units, whereas NBA 2K20 has sold 12 million units. On the other hand, Borderlands 3 has sold 10 million units. Lastly, The Outer Worlds has sold 2.5 million units.
Update to Take Two title sales:
Grand Theft Auto V – 130 million units
Red Dead Redemption 2 – 31 million units
NBA 2K20 – 12 million units (+33% vs 2K19)
Borderlands 3 – 10 million units
The Outer Worlds – 2.5 million unitsGTAV doesn't include free copies via Epic Store pic.twitter.com/I60UnQM2Eo
— Daniel Ahmad (@ZhugeEX) May 20, 2020
Unfortunately, Take-Two did not reveal any platform numbers or percentages. As such, we don’t know whether the PC sales of Borderlands 3 and The Outer Worlds were on par with the console sales. We also don’t know how much profit Take-Two did with the late releases of both GTA5 and RDR2.
Ironically, and while a lot of players have complained about the NBA 2K20’s awful microtransactions, the game has still sold 12 million units. That number is slightly higher than NBA 2K19’s sales. In other words, and despite the outcry, NBA 2K20 sold more units than its predecessor.
John is the founder and Editor in Chief at DSOGaming. He is a PC gaming fan and highly supports the modding and indie communities. Before creating DSOGaming, John worked on numerous gaming websites. While he is a die-hard PC gamer, his gaming roots can be found on consoles. John loved – and still does – the 16-bit consoles, and considers SNES to be one of the best consoles. Still, the PC platform won him over consoles. That was mainly due to 3DFX and its iconic dedicated 3D accelerator graphics card, Voodoo 2. John has also written a higher degree thesis on the “The Evolution of PC graphics cards.”
Contact: Email
It’s crazy how SJW garbage like Outer Worlds sells 2.5m… 2014 graphics, no rpg elements, bland and empty, can’t name yourself certain words, can’t even see yourself the entire game eventhough at the start of the game it forces you to design “yourself”
it was proof that the obsidian we know is long dead.
Also borderlands 3 10 million? wtf?
it was obvious from pillars 2 but i’m just curious, i never beat it, what kind of sjw things are we talking about?
all female characters look like they came from tumblr, androgynous ugly with short hair buzzcut and neon hair color. All the manly roles are filled by women, cowboy, mechanic, guard, police chief, etc etc, men are weak apart from black men. It even has a female hans solo with short hair and a party member is asexual lesbian and one of the loyalty missions is to hook her up with the head mechanic of a ship that was good looking in the trailers so they smeared sht all over her face to make her ugly. The writers on twitter are all tmblr feminists.
Obsidian is dead.
That “this girl is on fire” thing makes me want to puke…garbage ending, garbang story and soundtrack
Each SJW supporter buy 5 copies of the game..
Maybe because people who game casually tend to like the simpler stuff and are buying games in good numbers these days. Or at least good enough numbers.
GTA 5 this game has only redeeming quality everything else is a downgrade… And it sold 130 million….sigh ….well thanks kids and normies…
You bunch of sourpusses need to lighten up.
Games are meant to be enjoyed yet you spend all your time complaining about them instead. Gaming isn’t your hobby, complaining is.
When you’re a racist, sexist homophobe like most of the people that visit this site, it’s hard to enjoy things.
Is it “phobic” to point out that the human body is designed for male-female unions?
The human body isn’t designed to do anything. It’s evolution. It has no purpose, it’s just the laws of chance.
The human body does a lot of stuff that’s absolutely stupid.
And nature has plenty of same sex action outside of humans. It’s more normal than you think.
The human body isn’t designed […] evolution […] no purpose […] chance […] nature has plenty of same […] more normal than you think
What empirical evidence do you have in support of Darwin’s creation myth? Only observed similarities between organisms (morphologically, genetically, behaviorally, etc.) and random, minor genetic mutations that never result in newer and more complex genetic code, structure, or function.
No one has ever seen Life arise apart from the same kind of Life (or Life’s programs). If you disagree, then prove it.
What do we always see? What have human beings always observed everywhere? Life arising from the same kind of Life.
Polar bears eat their young. Black widows cannibalize their mates after they’re done with them. Lots of things happen in Nature that are quite unnatural.
There is a new virus on the planet that is wiping out thousands
of people per day that literally evolved from another Corona virus, and you still need evidence?
New, more complex genetic code happens all the time, even in your own body. Your own DNA changes as you age. We literally form new species of plants and animals by Genetic Modifcation (hear of organic fruits and GMO?). We can create new and more complicated DNA at will.
No one has seen a star form either, but we know they do.
Life exists, therefore it started somewhere. It’s pretty obvious.
You’re literally surrounded by proof and you can’t see it.
a new virus […] evolved from another […] more complex genetic code […] Your own DNA changes […] We literally form new species […] We can create new and more complicated DNA […] Life exists, therefore it started somewhere […] You’re literally surrounded by proof and you can’t see it
That’s ironic. Speaking of being fact-resistant …
1) That virus evolved (was engineered) from another virus. It is not an example of a newer and more complex form of life arising from simpler forms by only random, natural processes.
2) DNA’s changing within one’s body does not result in newer and more complex code, structure, and function. If that were true, then you would see human beings developing new code, structures, and abilities spontaneously now and throughout history.
3) Human beings’ modifying existing genetic code is an example of an intellect manipulating program, *not* random, natural processes producing code in the first place and then modifying it to form newer and more complex information, structures, etc.
You’re arguing for a Designer.
4) No one’s arguing that Life exists. (How inapt.) The question is how it came to be. You must know that Cell Theory affirms that cells, the basic unit of Life, come only from other cells. So how did that first cell arise?
Random, natural processes can act on only preexisting code — it doesn’t create it — and it never results in newer and more complex information, etc.
If you disagree, then prove it.
You won’t be able to, since we’ve only ever seen Life arise from the same kind of Life (or its programs).
Go get your degree in biology and then come back. We’ll have an educated discussion then.
It is clear your understanding is… at best… Flawed.
get your degree […] an educated discussion then [….] Flawed
Says the person unable to offer any actual evidence of the truth of his creation myth.
Bummer.
I can agree with you that there is little evidence of the origin of life. However, there is a lot of evidence on evolution. So much in fact that the scientific community considers it fact. We can observe it, produce it, and recreate it manually. From evolution, we can deduce that an organism would have started, essentially, as a single self-replicating protein like structure, similar to a virus honestly.
I say this as a biologist, but I’m also a Christian, believe it or not. Personally, I believe God created these laws of physics, or abides by them himself, and uses these mechanisms.
I’m not trying to be pedantic, just clear: We’re talking about how Life arose, not whether it did.
We do know how Life begins: It comes from always the same kind of Life (or Life’s programs).
How did the first cell(s) come about? Cell Theory says that cells arise from only other cells. This poses a titanic problem for the honest Darwinist.
The evolution we witness occurs on preexisting genetic code and within the boundaries allowed by it. It doesn’t produce new life from scratch, and it doesn’t result in newer and more complex program, structure, and function.
That’s argumentum ad verecundiam; even if the entire planet agreed on something, that wouldn’t necessarily make it true.
Scientists are not arbiters of truth; not every scientist believes Darwin’s story. Regardless, any thinking person can examine the evidence for himself and draw his own conclusions.
No one observed the first cell(s) arise. No one today sees cells arise from the muck by accident. When you talk about us “producing” and “manipulating,” then you’re arguing for the intervention of an Intellect.
If you disagree, then please provide a link to the documentation of this.
(It doesn’t exist.)
I hear that sentiment expressed often. “I believe in Jesus with my heart, but in my head I know Evolution is true.” If something isn’t literally true, then why believe it?
The Son of God referred to the Creation as a literal fact of history. If Moses’ accounts are false, then God did not form Man in His image, there was no sin in the Garden, there is no promise of a Messiah, and Jesus was either credulous or insane.
Consider this: No one has ever seen a cell form from the raw materials of which it is formed by only random, natural processes. No one. Ever.
But we always see Life arising from the same kind of Life (or its code) without exception.
Whom do those two facts better support, Moses or Darwin?
“How did the first cell(s) come about? Cell Theory says that cells arise from only other cells. This poses a titanic problem for the honest Darwinist.”
This is only because “theory” is largely test and proven. You cannot test or prove the origin of life because we cannot observe it and the material could not be fossilized to preserve a record. By definition, science cannot prove or disprove where life came from. It doesn’t make science wrong, it just means there will always be a whole there. However, based on other observations, we have a good idea of where it came from.
“But we always see Life arising from the same kind of Life (or its code) without exception.”
I’m not sure what your point is? We have observed one thing doesn’t discount something else that hasn’t been observed. They are not mutually exclusive.
“No one observed the first cell(s) arise. No one today sees cells arise from the muck by accident. When you talk about us “producing” and “manipulating,” then you’re arguing for the intervention of an Intellect.”
You don’t have to be able to observe something to know that it did happen. I can see a dog with teeth marks on his leg. I can’t observe that it happened, but there is other evidence that points to it.
You cannot test or prove the origin of life because we cannot observe it
Then it isn’t Science. Thank you for conceding the argument.
Wait, what point do you think you just made? Because you’re jumping to conclusions whatever it is.
It is science because we can still use it to make logical deductions. Just because it cannot be proven doesn’t mean science can’t get us to a reasonable hypothesis. Any way, likely, we will find a way to prove it. Just like germ theory, evolution, global warming, a round Earth, all those other things science disbelievers doubted.
If it isn’t observable, then it isn’t Science.
Anyone can make logically sound deductions from any premise, even if that premise is absurd. How is it reasonable to claim as fact that which no one has ever seen?
You’re talking about Science as if it’s magic. You think that because someone’s in a lab coat, their pronouncements are infallible. It’s not, and they’re not. Science is a systematic process of testing hypotheses, not a rubber stamp for what a “scientist” wishes were true.
We can see bacteria, virii, etc. We can see random, minor genetic mutations in living things. We can see that the Earth is roundish. (Global Cooling/Warming/Change/Apocalypse is another story.)
If you can’t show that it’s true, then how can you claim that it’s true? How can you reject anyone else’s claims as unsubstantiated or false? How many other things do you believe are true that no one’s ever seen?
You’re promoting atheistic naturalism, not Science.
how am i wrong on my statements on the outer soyworlds?
I am not, all of that is proven and documented you just call everyone racist sexist and homophobic, you sound like hillary clinton in the 2016 elections
“Trumps supporters are racist, sexist, homophobic, a bunch of deplorables”
Trump supporters are all those things, in my experience. They’re just too dumb to realize it. The dumbest ones of all always think they’re brilliant.
have you consider you are the dumb ones who think you are smart? Because trump is playing you like a damn fiddle.
Trump is only playing the idiots. People too stupid to see his lies, contradictions and flip flops. He can literally say anything, say the opposite, and his followers pretend he never said the first. The guy can’t even pronounce the word vegetable.
Someone, people think the guy who literally can’t speak large words or complete sentences is a genius. It’s absurd.
you sound like a moron who believes anything the media tells you about him i guess you also believe the “very fine people” hoax.
“Someone, people think the guy who literally can’t speak large words or complete sentences is a genius. ”
biden is his opposition.
Anyone with any sense knows the media is the feeder tube for the idiocy that’s taken over since Trump has been in office. People believe what they want. They don’t fact check, and the media of choice fees them whatever agenda they want. So no I don’t believe the media, but I do believe in research.
Biden isn’t much better, but he is better. A smart guy with dementia at least has some bright moments. An idiot is always an idiot…
omg you are a total moron the media are nothing more than dnc propganda even the late night comedians are dnc propaganda they have the exact same opinions. What is a fact check? Most of the fact checking the likes of snope and politifact are making are biased, to a point that the babylonbee a parody site gets fact checked by the fact checkers and then predicts what stupid thing these fact checking sites will say and it comes true. You want examples? What kinda research did you do. All of them from biased sources that omit things to change public opinion. Did you just seriously call biden smart? Seriously? The dude cant be president he has no stamina, no brains, no willingness to be a president. Yes trump unbdoubtly has all of that, biden is weak on china, biden cant possibly make a decision without help from behind the curtain and he is super corrupt. Biden doesnt care if the whole country is sold out to china. If trump is so dumb then explain to me how did he manage to become a bililonaire become a reality tv star, become the president, deliver the best economy in a long time and every time it looks like he say something stupid he is always proven right, how many times does he have to slip on a banana peel and make a perfect backflip in order for you to realize it cant be luck, he cant be a idiot savant but a stable genius playing you like a damn fiddle.
Even Jake Tapper admits that Trump was not referring to the supremacists “very fine people.”
I think you’re on to something.
That’s funny because it’s true.
But also a little sad. :p
Sure.
Frikking well said mate. All these clowns do is complain and complain some more. I almost never hear anything possitive from many of them whatsoever. They must be bitter as hell.!
What a sad way to live. Nothing is fun and great, all is doom and gloom. WTF are wrong with these people, it’s crazy and sad really :/
They can’t have fun so they wallow in misery.
Yeah it’s sad really. What a way to live :/
“Overrated bad games sell like hotcakes.”, an alternate title.
Endless trash. All of them.
Also that “analyst” has pronouns in Twatter bio = automatically discarded.