Jump to content

Talk:Rockstar North: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Juno.808 (talk | contribs)
new discussion point on Merging some of the topics and creating a new header
MiszaBot I (talk | contribs)
m Robot: Archiving 2 threads (older than 60d) to Talk:Rockstar North/Archive 1.
Line 24: Line 24:


<!--Please add new discussion to the ** BOTTOM **of this PAGE. Thank you.-->
<!--Please add new discussion to the ** BOTTOM **of this PAGE. Thank you.-->

== Scottish? ==

Is North officially Scotish? Because I know its based there but reading the "key" people are English. Given its diversity, wouldn't it be "British"? [[User:Stabby Joe|Stabby Joe]] ([[User talk:Stabby Joe|talk]]) 18:07, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Obviously you havent read it correctly since the key people are in fact the key people in relation to Rockstar Games not Rockstar North.... <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/86.157.108.214|86.157.108.214]] ([[User talk:86.157.108.214|talk]]) 12:33, 4 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:No need to be smug and remove it without hearing me out. I was simply asking given that the key people have a major role in the development of these games and are not Scotish, Dan being a producer AND writer and Sam being an Executive Producer, which aren't minor roles so I think me just asking seems perfectly valid. I'm not saying ITS NOT, I am just asking for clarification. PLUS you've changed both of them to British RIGHT AFTER editing here so I'm I have to ask why? Its somehwat suspicious. If they are suddenly British, why not North hmmm? And now its been changed to British? [[User:Stabby Joe|Stabby Joe]] ([[User talk:Stabby Joe|talk]]) 12:52, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

it is a scottish company because they are based in Scotland and that is more specific than 'British' and just because the 'key people' are english or whatever does not change that.[[User:Andrew22k|Andrew22k]] ([[User talk:Andrew22k|talk]]) 18:44, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

:Granted but is is registered? I mean if it makes money does Scotland only get it? I'm not trying to change its status BTW, I'm not setteling it before it started. [[User:Stabby Joe|Stabby Joe]] ([[User talk:Stabby Joe|talk]]) 23:40, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

R* North is Scottish. It's based in Scotland and its roots are Scottish. That R* Games [or R* New York] is based in the US or Dan & Sam Houser are of English origin doesn't change that. Dan & Sam live in the US nowadays and work directly for the New York HQ. That they have influence on R* North is quite normal because it is a subsidiary of R* Games. That such large teams like R* North are of many nationalities is also quite normal in games dev. business [cf. [[Crytek]] → german developer but international team]. –<sup>([[:de:Benutzer:Jello|de]])</sup>[[User:Wackelpudding|jello]] [[User talk:Wackelpudding|&iquest;?]] 14:53, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

:Right, thank you for clarification. [[User:Stabby Joe|Stabby Joe]] ([[User talk:Stabby Joe|talk]]) 22:09, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

It is a British company, because they are a registered British company, operating in the UK, based in Edinburgh, a city in Britain. If Scotland becomes independant then fine, call it a Scottish company, but isn't this supposed to be a factual encyclopedia? Rhetorical question obviously, legally it is British, in the name of FACTS and because this is a FACTUAL ENCYCLOPEDIA it should be called a British company.... [[User:Avae010|Avae010]]


:Scotland is a nation, whether you like it or not, its part of the UK, but the FACT is that it is still a nation. [[User:Nar Matteru|Nar Matteru]] ([[User talk:Nar Matteru|talk]]) 08:02, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Look in an encylopedia facts are important, legally Rockstar North is not a Scottish company, it may be based in Edinburgh, but the fact is that it is A LEGALLY REGISTERED BRITISH COMPANY with the UK INLAND REVENUE. Check out the legality yourself, http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/81373b689c3aa7bf631db49e0ef30be5/compdetails . <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/86.146.52.171|86.146.52.171]] ([[User talk:86.146.52.171|talk]]) 13:48, 8 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

::A: Calm down, and stop with the caps locks. Even if you are right, the world will not end because someone confused the two.
::B: don't paste temporary links as a source, all that gives is a blank page.

::I did however search the company on the same site again, and it doesn't say anything at all about it being registered in Britain. As a matter of fact, The only British address given was their ''mailing'' address, which is actually their parent company's (Take Two, which is American)) British location. A mailing address doesn't mean anything as for as registration. [[User:Nar Matteru|Nar Matteru]] ([[User talk:Nar Matteru|talk]]) 16:34, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

::hahhaa irony, I just read an article about how Leslie Benzies is upset at the Scottish government for not promoting grand theft auto enough http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=188104 [[User:Nar Matteru|Nar Matteru]] ([[User talk:Nar Matteru|talk]]) 22:02, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Well Im not sorry for pointing out the obvious to you, but by the very fact that it is registered in the British Governments' Companies House, it is by definition a British business, if you actually looked then you would have seen that it's legal country of origin is the United Kingdom, not Scotland, not Turkmenistan, not Narnia, but the United Kingdom. Additionally, in response to your assertation that the only address that is registered is a 'mailing address' this is quite simply misleading, legally they must specify the location of their administrative headquarters, that is quite seperate however from the reality that Rockstar North is a registered British company. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/81.129.147.220|81.129.147.220]] ([[User talk:81.129.147.220|talk]]) 00:59, 9 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

::OK. for the last time. Scotland is a country. It doesn't have to be independent from the United Kingdom to be a country. It is a constituent country of the United Kingdom. It is not a "state" or any other such lesser thing. It is STILL a country. As are all the other constituent countries of the UK. It is headquartered in Edinburgh Scotland. Because Scotland is a country, I can call it a Scottish company very damn well. There wouldn't be a 'Scottish' page to link to If I couldn't. It is, a scottish company. If you want to change every single page that has the word 'Scottish' in it to British you will be changing a very large portion of wikipedia. Please read WP:UKNATIONALS.

::Regarding the so called "registration". It has an English mailing address that has absolutely nothing to do with its "registration" as the mailing address belongs to its parent company which is an American company and aside from being parent, is a separate entity altogether. [[User:Nar Matteru|Nar Matteru]] ([[User talk:Nar Matteru|talk]]) 01:16, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Alright, this is frankly becoming rather bizzarre and I find your attitude frankly unwarranted. Now im not embarrassed or ashamed to be wrong, I have researched this and you claim to have done likewise, yet you continue to mislead. Im not argueing over the existance of Scotland, what im argueing with you is that your now completely ignoring the facts about this. Rockstar North is legally a British company, it is a British company because there is not registration agency for doing so in Scotland, there is only one such agency, it is Company House, an executive agency of the United Kingdom government. If you find Rockstar North's name in the database of Company House, it is THEREFORE A BRITISH COMPANY. It is not registered under it's parent company, it has to register with its legal trading name.
Addittionaly, in regards to WP:UKNATIONALS, that has nothing to do with businesses, it is in relation to the nationality of the peoples of the UK, though I assume you knew this already. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/81.129.147.220|81.129.147.220]] ([[User talk:81.129.147.220|talk]]) 01:48, 9 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Look, maybe im coming across too strong and it's absolutely not my intention to offend you, really its not, I respect your opinion. Im only debating so vehemantly, not as an English person who wants to steal Rockstar North and claim it as British because it operates in Scotland (believe it or not I live in Scotland), but because of the fact that it is indeed a British company, though its offices are in Edinburgh. I wanted to clear the air, I hope you are not offended, though i'm standing by my guns and not giving an inch. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/81.129.147.220|81.129.147.220]] ([[User talk:81.129.147.220|talk]]) 02:31, 9 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

::http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Companies_of_Scotland All of those must not exist. Start changing.

::http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Companies_House#Scotland Apparently, Scotland does do its own registrations, which are subject to its own laws and regulations. Whether those registrations are folded into the UK's main registry, I could care less. The point of the location in this article is to show where the company is based, not necessarily whose house and country it was legally registered into. And to be as specific as possible, it is clearly based in Scotland.

:: oh and I know the policy really only applies to people, but it can still apply to this case (a company after all, is made up of people) [[User:Nar Matteru|Nar Matteru]] ([[User talk:Nar Matteru|talk]]) 03:09, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Right, firstly Companies House has registration offices in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Cardiff and London, all of these offices are merely offices of the UK agency itself. Secondly, the point of this debate is whether or not it is a UK company based on Edinburgh, I quote the original article "...is a Scottish developer based in Edinburgh,Scotland.", surprisingly you seem to be deviating from this. Addittionally, Scottish business have to comply with the UK Companies Act 2006, this superceedes Scottish Law, fact. All incorporated or limited businesses legally must register with Companies House, making any business registered with Companies House UK businesses. This is an important legal distinction, since there is no sovereign entity called Scotland, nor one called England or Wales, the only sovereign legal entity here is the UK. So forgive my earlier statements, it should be called a UK company.

:OR since the wording had nothing to do with any legality and was just a descriptive word to show where the company was located, Scottish works fine. Or what it is now. If you want to add ", UK" after "Edinburgh, Scotland", feel free to do so. [[User:Nar Matteru|Nar Matteru]] ([[User talk:Nar Matteru|talk]]) 03:24, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

++ Furthermore, I quote the Companies Act 2006 Chapter 46 "...provides for a single company law regime applying to the whole of the UK, so that companies will be UK companies..." ++

So again, your simply not providing factual points and your relying on user generated wikipedia articles.


Well, [[A.G. Barr]], makers of [[Irn-Bru]] have on the front page of their website "A.G.Barr p.l.c., Westfield House, 4 Mollins Road, Westfield, Cumbernauld, G68 9HD Registered in Scotland (Reg No SC5653)". I don't know the legal basis of this but certainly suggests that they are registered, in Scotland, and that there is a distinction between a Scottish company and a British one. [[User:Neilgravir|Neilgravir]] ([[User_talk:Neilgravir|talk]]) 19:30, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


Clear as mud, then. The constant petty squabbling and distinctions between English/British, Scottish/British and English born Australian (etc, etc) on Wikipedia is reaching such a petty heights that it's almost reminiscent of the former Yugoslavia here. The arguments and vandalism are exposing some very insecure xenophobes. [[User:Guv2006|Guv2006]] ([[User talk:Guv2006|talk]]) 05:54, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Not that I want to wade into this argument, but if you look at any other company who is based in the UK, they are referred to as a British company. Even the [[Royal Bank of Scotland Group|Royal Bank of Scotland]] has British and United Kingdom mentioned in it.

Also, I'd like to point out that WP:UKNATIONALS says

"1.Look at what others have done in comparable articles."

What others have done is label any company based in any of the constituent countries as British, although infoboxes may sometimes use "Scotland, UK" in them. In the interests of fairness, would it not be better to say "...is a British company, based in Edinburgh, Scotland."?[[User:TomB123|TomB123]] ([[User talk:TomB123|talk]]) 17:00, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

:Rockstar North is an English registered company (company number 03312220; its registered office is in [[Windsor, Berkshire]]) which is based in Scotland. The reason for the distinction is that there are three separate legal systems within the United Kingdom: Northern Ireland, Scotland, and England and Wales. That's why Scottish companies have the "SC" prefix in their company numbers and Northern Irish companies have an "NI" prefix. [[User:Jmorrison230582|Jmorrison230582]] ([[User talk:Jmorrison230582|talk]]) 05:58, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

It may be registered in England and have a few key English employees, but it still should be called a Scottish company. As most of the creative employees working there are Scottish. Making most of what Rockstar North produces Scottish creations. [[Special:Contributions/95.151.33.143|95.151.33.143]] ([[User talk:95.151.33.143|talk]]) 22:50, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

== Why is the article for "Agent" directed to this one? ==

The article for the PS3 exclusive Rockstar North developed game, is gone. Why?... because it seems to be directed to this article instead. There really needs to be a good reason for this, because the original article gave information worth knowing about the game & could be updated heavily in the future. The arctile for Rockstar North doesn't even list the game, let alone mention it. - Someone needs to come up with a good reason for the direction, or otherwise I'll change it back myself. [[User:Jas315|Jas315]] ([[User talk:Jas315|talk]]) 02:49, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
:You have right, I`ve done it. --Artur, 10:07, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

::The reason it was redirected here is that the article was nominated for deletion and the result of that debate was to merge it into this article. See the notice at the top of this page. I have reverted the recreation of that article as per the ADF debate. [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 12:12, 24 June 2009 (UTC)


== Rockstar North Origin Problem ==
== Rockstar North Origin Problem ==
Line 216: Line 136:


== Merging Topics ==
== Merging Topics ==

Hi everybody,
Hi everybody,



Revision as of 03:26, 2 October 2013


Rockstar North Origin Problem

Sorry for the inconvenience, I kept on clicking on the wrong talk page hyperlink and nothing would appear (also I made this account). Now to the main point, I have had a Problem with the origin of the Rockstar North Head Quarters, it is clearly in the heart of Scotland, Edinburgh but it states it is on British land which is also true but misleading and not giving enough credit to the country it is located, Scotland. I know this problem has gone on for many years, for example, Andy Murray is a famous Tennis player, he is known as a British Tennis player when he succeeding in his career and he is known as a Scottish Tennis player when he is preceding in his career. With the launch of Rockstar North's new installment to Rockstar Games' "Best-Selling" franchise, Grand Theft Auto V , Grand Theft Auto enthusiasts like myself would like to learn something new from its developers. I know it states it is located in Scotland but I could be more specific since the majority of the world thinks that Scotland is a County in the country Great Britain. I could come to an agreement if we let visitors of the page know that it was located in the Country Scotland and the sovereign state Britain instead of them thinking that Scotland is a County in the Country Britain. - MisterFR3SH 01 (talk) 20:52, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Answering your points separately:
1) "British" is misleading. Doesn't give credit to Scotland: The article clearly states in the first line and in the infobox, that the company is in Scotland. This is not a question of what land it is on. British is a non-governmental term that refers to anywhere in the British Isles. It is akin to calling a person from Nigeria and a person from Zambia, both Africans. People and companies from The British Isles are called British and Britons, this is totally independent of any notion of a nation. If Scotland votes for devolution, people from Scotland will still be British because they live on the Island of Great Britain in the British Isles. The disagreement seems to stem from the use of Britain as a short-form synonym for The United Kingdom, which is a nation state made up of its constituent parts. Scotland is part of the UK so the term British is correct. Scotland is also part of Great Britian, so again British is correct. The article then explicitly avoids confusion by stating the location of the company offices is Scotland.
2) Andy Murray is British when he wins and Scottish fails: I can only suggest you stop reading the tabloids and head down south where you will find that loads of non-Scots support him regardless of his birth place. The only time you may find people not liking him is when they don't know that his "anyone but England" statement was a misquoted private joke.
3) "The World thinks that Scotland is a county in Great Britain:" Like I said, Great Britain isn't a country. "The World" may be getting confused with the fact that Scotland along with England, Wales and Northern Ireland are equal partners in the country that is The United Kingdom, but short of putting an explanation of the UK, Britain, British etc on the front page of Wikipaedia, I'm not sure how we solve the World ignorance that you mention.
4) Agreement if we let visitors know location is Country Scotland and the sovereign state Britain instead of them thinking that Scotland is a County in the Country Britain: The article already lets people know that the company is located in Scotland.
This debate raises the question of how do you define the nationality of a company? Which of the following apply?:
"Its in Scotland" - "Rockstar North is a Scottish video game developer..."
"Its in Great Britain" - "Rockstar North is a British video game developer..."
"Its in the UK" - "Rockstar North is a British video game developer..."
"Its American owned" - "Rockstar North is an American video game developer..."
"Its staff are from numerous countries" - "Rockstar North is a multinational video game developer..."
The present form is a long standing consensus that covers all the information that a reader needs. - X201 (talk) 10:06, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK then, you win but Rockstar Toronto Head Quarters is located in Canada but on its Wikipedia page, it states it is a Canadian based company, not a North American company. I do not read tabloids, I watch Wimbledon when it is on, and it normally states that Murray is British when he is succeeding and Scottish hen he is preceding giving Scotland a bad name, an unfortunately, that is shown around the world, making watchers think that Scotland is a bad place even though it has one of the finest game developers in the world and a beautiful landscape. I just think that it is unfair but I am not everyone. - MisterFR3SH 01 (talk) 16:36, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I am of the opinion that Rockstar North is a British video game developer based in... is the appropriate way of phrasing it. Firstly, currently Scotland, England, Northern Ireland and Wales make up the United Kingdom. When you register a company within any of these countries, you register it within the United Kingdom, not the individual companies. The location/headquarters etc can be based in a country but the company is based in the United Kingdom. People and entities from the UK are referred to as British, ergo, they are a British Company. Looking at other articles (such as Id software) they tend to start with X is a <american/british/iranian> video game company based in <city/state/country> etc. Cabe6403 (TalkSign) 16:14, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Why don't we focus off nationality and focus on it as an entity of Rockstar Games? For example:

Rockstar North is a video game development studio of Rockstar Games located in Edinburgh, Scotland. Then the rest of the lead

--Edit I didn't purposely leave off formally DMA and the VGD link, I just paraphrased and forgot the link

This way the Rockstar Games has "credit" of ownership of Rockstar North. Also in the opening sentence, it doesn't really matter where Rockstar Games is located but what does matter is where Rockstar North is located since that's what this article is about. As as side note, the lead really needs to be rewritten to fit the guidelines of a lead

Anyway, just my opinion. ChadH (talk) 00:47, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is of my opinion, that it is fine the way it is. It is just various political nationalistic views coming across. It's fine the way it is. People need to get over this "I'm not British, I'm Scottish, I'm English blah blah blah" Point is, the world mostly knows the UK as the UK. they already get confused with "Oh you live in England, how wonderful, do you know the Queen?" As long as it shows that it is based in Scotland then it should be fine, but is still British (It will be registered with the companies people in London). As for the American, well American is, one could argue, made up of countries (states) to form a United States (lets face it, some are bigger than Scotland) just like the UK which in turn is made up of different states/countries. MisterShiney 07:24, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Dailly

I do not know who keeps adding this fictional person to these articles but....

  1. Mike Dailly was not a founder of DMA Design Ltd, therefore he did not invent Grand Theft Auto
  2. DMA Design was a subsidiary of DMA Design Ltd
  3. Rockstar was actually founded by Sam & Dan Houser
  4. Rockstar Games, bought out DMA Design Ltd
  5. DMA Design Ltd invented Grand Theft Auto, not DMA Design
  6. The only relevant source that this person had anything to do with Grand Theft Auto is a registered domain

owned by that very person, who clearly states in the copyright disclaimer that...

Text © Copyright 2004-2006 By Mike Dailly
All rights reserved.

dmadesign.org is in no way assosiated with DMA Design Ltd, Take-2 or Rockstar Studios.

So please remove all of this unfactual information. And for that matter the company has no records of employing a Russell Kay in their enitre history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.240.218.211 (talkcontribs) 18:29, 10 February 2013‎

Hello, I assume you have a source for this information? I say so, because it is more than likely that if it is included in the article, because it is such a specific piece of detailed information, that it is cited and sourced appropriately. MisterShiney 18:55, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Scottish company rather than British?

"Rockstar North (formerly DMA Design Ltd) is a British video game developer based in Edinburgh, Scotland"

I think the new text should read "Rockstar North (formerly DMA Design Ltd) is a Scottish video game developer based in the Capital City Edinburgh"

The reason for this is that Scotland is a more specific location and recognised internationally easier than "Britain". With all due respect to non-Brits reading this, it is a well known fact that people living outside of Britain are often unclear about what Britain is actually made up of. I think calling it Scottish and identifying Edinburgh as the Capital City will make the location instantly recognisable.

I'd like to hear your views on this.

Many thanks,

Michael — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michaelc840 (talkcontribs) 17:24, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In case you aren't already aware, if you really are looking for views on this you could read the two lengthy discussions that have already taken place above. -- Fyrael (talk) 20:42, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am aware of the previous posts but thanks for your suggestion. I have read the previous posts and feel that the argument is in favour of having Britain changed to Scotland. If no valid argument is presented against changing the post to Scotland withihn the next 10 days, I will proceed to edit the opening paragraph to read Scotland rather than Britain and if any attempts are made to reverse this back to Britain I will have no option but to undo their change and report the user of vandalism to the page.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michaelc840 (talkcontribs) 23:40, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You really haven't made any new points so far that haven't already been addressed, so I don't see how it warrants changing the stable version of the article. As has been said repeatedly, the current wording includes what is likely the nation that the company is registered under (UK), as well as where it is physically located (Scotland). Also, please don't try to preemptively threaten other editors. While it is amusing, it's not very constructive. -- Fyrael (talk) 04:17, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, the topic has been brought up multiple times already and the current lead seems to acknowledge both sides. The repeated changes can lead to unwarranted edit warring. Stabby Joe (talk) 13:00, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Joining Take-Two

Hi,

Just noticed that in the intro this states that Rockstar North has been a part of Take-Two Interactive since 2002, "Since early 2002 the company has been a part of the multinational company Rockstar Games, owned by Take-Two Interactive." which is not true.

Rockstar was initially bought by Take-Two from Infograms in September 1999 and then changed its name initially to Rockstar Studio's in March 2002 then Rockstar North in May of the same year.

Links for reference: Take-Two take over http://uk.gamespot.com/news/take-two-acquires-dma-design-2450265

Rockstar Studio's rename: http://uk.ign.com/articles/2002/03/19/scottish-developer-becomes-rockstar http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/article_45659


Rockstar North Rename: http://uk.ign.com/articles/2002/05/24/e3-2002-rockstar-studios-changes-name-again


Could we get this changed? thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anthony.job99 (talkcontribs) 14:12, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Merging Topics

Hi everybody,

I was looking through this article today and I would like to propose merging some of the section headers. If we moved the DMA Arrangement into the Mid 90's section and created a new late 90's section to include the release of GTA 1 and 2, as well as Space Station Silicon Valley and Body Harvest then made a new Early 2000's section to cover the companies move from Dundee to Edinburgh as well as the focus on GTA and Manhunt after the Take Two buy it it would make the article more structured and more informative.

Happy to make these changes myself but thought I would reach out to the community here first, thanks Juno.808 (talk) 20:57, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]