Clearly he was insulted enough to share his annoyance and show people who much value these days people place on music, which he disagrees.
One of the best things about the digital revolution of the past 30 years of so is the way it's affected the revenue models for music.
Frankly there's few people less deserving of the obscene sums of money that the music firms and some musicians used to be able command for simply putting out something, often knocked up in one afternoon in a drug fuelled haze, on yet another physical format.
At least footballers have to put a bit of ongoing work in to maintain fitness for the large amounts of money they are paid for kicking a ball about.
I think the current situation is far preferable where such artists make most of their money from actually putting in the work and touring.
At least then there's a more direct relationship between what's being paid and what's being provided.
I think this is just a generation clash. As has been pointed elsewhere in the thread Ware earned a lot of his money during the heyday for music sales. His track was no doubt on a list of possibles for GTA6 that they were working through and I doubt R* cared much when he said no and moved onto the next song.
People claiming its an insulting offer need to consider and contrast the thousands of people working for years that it will have taken to produce GTA6 well before any already existing works are incorporated into the finished product.
Expecting a % of the sales for such a bit piece of a works is laughable.
Apparently he was offered 22.5k as it was 7500 each for the 3 rights holders.
He then countered with 75k , does that mean per rights holder ? So 225k lol
As others have said its really a case of what's the typical offer elsewhere for similar use.
Comparing use in a streaming service to GTA6 is apples to oranges for example as the revenue model for streaming often means more tracks played are tied to more advertisements sold hence why payment per play makes more sense.
