Take-Two boss gets philosophical about 'entropy' and life after Grand Theft Auto: 'If we're not trying new things ... we're really running the risk of burning the furniture to heat the house'

pcgamer.com:

Nothing lasts in our garden of Earthly delights, not even hit videogames, and that's why it's vital to try new things—so says Strauss Zelnick, chairman and CEO of Take-Two Interactive, the man who's presided over the sale of more than 205 million Grand Theft Auto videogames, one of the biggest and most consistent hit series of all time.

Zelnick's philosophical musing came during last week's Q2 2025 investors call, in response to a question about whether consumers are receptive to new things as opposed to old things. Take-Two, the parent of Rockstar Games, is at first blush very much known for its «legacy IP»—most obviously Grand Theft Auto and Red Dead Redemption. But Zelnick is seemingly envisioning a future in which those games aren't quite the behemoths they have been over the past two decades.

«We know that if we put out a sequel, it's a lower-risk proposition than new intellectual property,» Zelnick said. «But everything degrades. And even though most of our franchise sequels tend to do better than the prior release—and we're really proud of that because that's not standard for the industry—the truth is there is this thing called decay and entropy. It's a feature of physics and human life and everything that exists on earth.

»And so ultimately, everything does decay, including hit titles. So if we're not trying new things and making new intellectual property, we're—to say that we're resting on our laurels really understates it. We're really running the risk of burning the furniture to heat the house. And that doesn't end well."

Zelnick said Take-Two's «hit ratios are really high for this industry,» but also acknowledged that the «risk profile» of new IPs is higher than rolling with known quantities, and that Take-Two does «get it wrong» now and then. But, he added, «if we had not been willing to create new intellectual property when we showed up here 18 years ago when the risk profile of this enterprise was vastly greater than it is today, well, then none of us