Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it,
follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given
their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!
Old Rock Band Thread - OP has FAQ stuff
Posts
Xbox: UnbreakableVows | PSN/Wii U: UnbreakableVow | 3DS: 1521-3241-9354
Rock Band 2 & The Beatles: Rock Band not compatible?
Xbox: UnbreakableVows | PSN/Wii U: UnbreakableVow | 3DS: 1521-3241-9354
Not a big deal to me. The Beatles are the only band (and maybe zep) that have an amazing enough catalog of music that I wouldn't want anything else showing up and ruining the vibe. Once this comes out I probably won't even want to play another band on this game for many months.
DON'T PANIC
Oh, I'm sure it will do well. The Beatles are a big enough band to warrant their own title.
Just a disappointing, and back-pedaling decision on Harmonix's part. I'm sure it's due to legal reasons with the Beatles' rights team. Many will buy the game regardless, some won't. I'm probably one of the rare exceptions, but I transferred over from Guitar Hero along with Harmonix and supported their "platform" by purchasing every piece of DLC available, regardless of whether I knew/liked the song or not. I trust their song-selection process, and have discovered many great new artists due to Rock Band's DLC. I would have bought the [Beatles] game, paid more to export the tracks to the Rock Band 2 master track list, and would have supported new Beatles DLC alongside the already stellar weekly Rock Band/Rock Band 2 releases. But I have to believe that this is just the first step in Harmonix moving towards the Activision/Guitar Hero way of business. What was once the "platform" is now segmented, and I would not only be surprised if this is not the last band-focused Rock Band title Harmonix releases, but if Rock Band 3 (in 2010) did not somehow abandoned our DLC backwards compatibility.
Oh, I totally understand that. Harmonix made the financially sound decision of doing whatever had to be done to get the rights. Did it "back pedal" something they said about Rock Band being a "platform" in the past? Yes. Did they still make the right decision, as in the one that will make them money, and prevent Activision from aquiring the Beatles license? Yes. Are the Beatles going to miss out on potential revenue of those of us who would buy the disc, then perhaps even pay extra for a license (single use license of course, like the AC/DC disc used) to export tracks into Rock Band 2? Yes. I'm an example of missed revenue.
Edit: Or your super cool band doing their songs. No, probably. not.
I wouldn't imagine character models would export, just tracks.
And as I said earlier, I think that The Beatles: Rock Band just opens the door for other band-focused "Rock Band" games from Harmonix. With the crazy number of Guitar Hero SKUs Activision is cranking out, and the Rock Band DLC release schedule, the battle for "exclusives" for music games is only going to get more heated as time goes on. Who's the next big band to demand a band-focused game? Activision will do it, and now Harmonix realizes they will have to as well if they plan to compete. Just an observation is all.
Crappy singers cover Beatles works all the time, I'm sure. In public no doubt.
Ah, but they did add "Rock Band". And from what I've seen from E3 demos, the game looks 99% the same as Rock Band. Three vocalists harmonizing, and non-user created characters doesn't change much.
I doubt this was the first opportunity for Harmonix to make a band focused game, but it was the first one that made any sense, and it was the only way to get the Beatles. The only reason they are making this standalone is because it is the only way to get it done, and it is completely worth it.
DON'T PANIC
If you could export tracks to RB from Beatles: Your goth/hillbilly/emo band would be playing Beatles songs.
If you could play RB DLC in Beatles: The Fab 4 would be jamming to Maiden.
I don't think Apple Corps wanted to entertain either situation and moved that the game be standalone and focus on the Beatles, which is well within their realm of requests given the status of the band. Additionally, you're coming off as cynical as the people freaking out that there's already a Left4Dead2 on the horizon, or Chicken Little. Your choice.
Again, I don't think Rock Band DLC would have to work in Beatles, just the other way around. DLC didn't work in the AC/DC track pack, and I'm sure that Rock Band DLC doesn't work in the regular track packs.
As for your example, that is in no way the same as what's going on here. The Left4Dead developer didn't state that their game would be bulit upon by a large library of DLC, with backwards compatibility with titles from the franchise in the future, then turn around and announce a Left4Dead-titled game that's basically the same as the prior one, but does not stand by their compatibility statement. Two very different beasts.
Your argument is that your are upset because a commercial video game company wants to make money. Instead of listening to any sort of logic about the entire process and why the Beatles is a standalone game, which was a known entity since last year, you are putting your fingers in your ears and singing loudly. Just because the Rock Band branding was placed on it for a merchandising standpoint, the incompatibility of the DLC between the two should not have been an earth shattering shock that sealed the deal of you skipping the game. Anything related to that was a pipe dream that you were mislead to by lack of information. Don't blame a company because your reading comprehension conflicted with reality.
They're the ones with yellow caps. No other difference externally. Also, 3 for 3 on these so far, score.
Quite incorrect. Read my second or third post on the issue, a page or two back I belive it was.
I clearly indicated that the decision to do the game, sans-export, was wise on Harmonix's part. Had they refused we'd be playing Guitar Hero: The Beatles instead, and they would have made no money...
My point is simply this:
They said the Beatles title wasn't "Rock Band", but then added "Rock Band" to the name. They said "Rock Band" was a platform built on compatibility of tracks between their titles. That platform has been segmented now. Segmenting the platform, and the pretty-much guaranteed success of the Beatles game, potentially leads to other bands demanding similar treatment, treatment that we know Activision will hand out. Harmonix will have to do the same if they plan to stay in the rhythm game market with Activision.
Do not misread me, Harmonix will come out high on the hog after the Beatles game hits the street.
But as a consumer, I'm now weary.
Haven't seen any yellow-capped ones.
Damn you, wherever you live!
Xbox: UnbreakableVows | PSN/Wii U: UnbreakableVow | 3DS: 1521-3241-9354
They added the "Rock Band" part into the title because they know the Rock Band title sells. That's it. That's pretty much the only reason. If I were Joe Average Consumer and didn't know the Rock Band guys were making a Beatles game, and I just saw a game titled "The Beatles", I'd probably be weary of how good the actual game was. But now I see "The Beatles" and right next to it is that familiar-fonted Rock Band logo. Okay, I have Rock Band 2 and that's really solid! These guys know what they're doing. Sale!
As for the other part of the comment, Led Zeppelin aside (whom Harmonix hinted they'd like to do a game centered around shortly after the announcement of The Beatles), no other bands can demand that kind of treatment. And receive it, anyways.
Xbox: UnbreakableVows | PSN/Wii U: UnbreakableVow | 3DS: 1521-3241-9354
Actually, I think it's the other way around. It says Rock Band, so people who were attracted by the Beatles name, will notice the Rock Band logo on those other games that are out there.
Either way it makes a lot of sense.
So, take your top 10 favorite songs of all time, whatever they are, and say Harmonix added them as DLC for the PSP version of Rock Band, Rock Band: Unplugged. Say they also opted not to port those songs over to their console "Rock Band platform", ever. Ever. You're okay with this, no? I mean, Rock Band on the PSP is worlds different in terms of gameplay, compared to the differences of Rock Band and The Beatles: Rock Band. We can't possibly consider it part of the "platform", even if it says "Rock Band" and is the same font.
As for bands getting solo treatment, I hardly think that Led Zeppelin and The Beatles are the only bands popular enough to warrant their own music games. Michael Jackson. The Rolling Stones. I don't want to play the "my band is better than your band" game, but Led Zeppelin and The Beattles are hardly the only bands with a great library of songs, and a long, amazing career. And as I said before, as the music game genre continues, the war for exclusives will get bloodier and bloodier as the well of untapped, iconic artists/songs dries up.
I don't doubt we'll get another band-centric Rock Band, I just doubt it would be under the strict conditions The Beatles are under. If it weren't a straight-up track pack like AC/DC, I'd imagine that if, say, a Rolling Stones game were made, you'd be able to export them (simply because Rolling Stones have no problem licensing out their music, even in the video game world they've been everywhere).
Xbox: UnbreakableVows | PSN/Wii U: UnbreakableVow | 3DS: 1521-3241-9354
Also I don't look at Rock Band: Unplugged as part of the Rock Band "platform" because those songs must be bought separately. Yeah, I really dig "Under the Bridge", but I'm not going to pay for it twice just so I can play it on two different systems.
Xbox: UnbreakableVows | PSN/Wii U: UnbreakableVow | 3DS: 1521-3241-9354
Also: Songs appearing in Unplugged not already in the Rock Band Catalog are coming as DLC for RB1&2. This includes a Jackson 5 song. Holy crap, you don't read anything. Astounding.
I know songs from the Rock Band: Unplugged are coming to the console. It was a hypothetical.
It was a means of illustrating a point.
I suppose since my opinion differs from yours, I am in the wrong.
You're right, I submit. HMX pleases 100% of their customers. There's nothing here to discuss.
The only DLC shenanigans have been happening in the Guitar Hero franchise, where I cannot honestly tell you which games' DLC works in the others.
The Beatles game not only would have licensing issues but it also runs on a slightly different game engine. Those two factors were probably the main reasons why exporting wasn't allowed.
If you are on the fence in buying the game because of this, you probably weren't going to buy it in the first place.
tails Gets trolled
Would Apple have given HMX/EA the liscense to do the game if they didn't make it incompatible with other RB games? Of course not, but HMX/EA guess (rightly) that they can still make a shitload of money off of a Beatles game. In fact, had the game been titled something like "The Beatles Music Game" or something, I'd be a lot cooler with it, but it's not. It's titled "The Beatles: Rock Band" which, going by every single other Rock Band item, means that it should work with other Rock Band versions. It doesn't.
Why should I spend $60+ for a game that won't even use my downloaded DLC? DLC that has cost me somewhere around $100-$150, if not more than that. I wanted the game primarily so I could have really good '60s and '70s song selection in Rock Band, as there's not enough Dead and Dylan to make it happen. A smattering of Beatles tunes would've given me quite a rockin' selection of songs (though, I'd also kill for some Beach Boys, Elvis, and Chuck Berry but that's probably not gonna happen).
It's not about the Fab 4 singing Battery or whatever, or my own band doing Beatles songs. It's about what the Rock Band platform has as its single advantage over the Guitar Hero franchise. HMX is losing that to put out a title functionally equivalent to all the random-ass GH games like Aerosmith, Metallica, and Van Halen. That's pretty much bullshit by any measure, in my opinion.
tails Gets trolled
Seriously, this really isn't worth arguing about. This looks like a flea fighting an elephant here. Whatever your position is, deal with the reality of it.
You're muckin' with a G!
I agree with you but you're such a condescending douche
I don't disagree that getting The Beatles is a big deal. It's the goddamn Beatles, I'd be an idiot to argue that.
However, if Activision/Neversoft made a Guitar Hero: The Beatles, would it be fundamentally different from The Beatles: Rock Band? Let's run through a list of things that the usual band-specific GH games do and see how they shore up:
DLC: Game specific. DLC for GH: Aerosmith and GH: Metallica is incompatible with mainline GH games like GH3 and GHWT. The only exception to this is Death Magnetic, which works in GHWT and GH:M
Instruments: Red Octane usually produces superior equipment than HMX, with the exception (in my opinion) being the RB2 drums. GH: Metallica like GH: Aerosmith (and most likely like GH: Van Halen) came bundled with a Red Octane buitar, but unlike GH:A GH:M merely came bundled with the GHWT guitar and not drums. With the Beatles, it's safe to say that Red Octane would have likely produced a full band kit due to the popularity of the license.
Song List: Here's the killer, likely. Guitar Hero: Metallica has 28 Metallica songs and 21 songs from other bands, with Death Magnetic being the only album kind of available. Guitar Hero Aerosmith has 41 songs, 29 from the band itself. HMX is publishing The Beatles: Rock Band with 45 songs, all from the Beatles with plans to offer every Beatles album (13 albums in the catalog according to Wiki) with Abbey Road being the first, but with no set release schedule unlike the weekly RB DLC releases.
So, the only difference is more songs from the band (necessitated by the agreement, no doubt) and more reliable DLC support. So no, the virtue of the Rock Band liscense isn't really being used here, and the game is only slightly different in implentation than a Guitar Hero: The Beatles would have likely been.
So again, we arrive at my conclusion, that The Beatles: Rock Band is a different platform than the one I mainly enjoy. While it shares two words with the franchise that I like, it is fundamentally unrelated and thus a seperate product. So, when staring at a late year release schedule like the one being built up, why should I get it over, say, Lego Rock Band? When, in fact, it appears much more likely that Lego Rock Band will mesh with my existing song catalog for my other Rock Band games.
Now, if Lego Rock Band doesn't work and GH5 actually has compatiblity with songs already released for GHWT, then this will be the first year I take GH over Rock Band. However, I'm fairly confident that HMX and Telltale can work out agreements so that Lego Rock Band songs will still be a part of the original Rock Band platform and not a seperate deal like The Beatles: Rock Band.
@gamefacts - Totally and utterly true gaming facts on the regular!
Yes, we know that it will not.
From Wiki:
"Downloadable content for The Beatles: Rock Band will not be playable on other Rock Band titles. Likewise, downloadable content for Rock Band will not be compatible with The Beatles: Rock Band. In keeping the content between the two separated, there will also be no export function in The Beatles: Rock Band that will allow one to copy the game's disc songs to a console's hard drive (Ã la the original Rock Band or various Rock Band "Track Packs")."
See this paragraph? The one here where you assume that LEGO Rock Band will allow for exporting or importing? This is why people aren't happy that B:RB doesn't allow for it. They got their hopes up well before anything was officially confirmed. Hell, they got their hopes up well before it was officially confirmed and after HMX essentially suggested that importing and exporting wouldn't happen in the Beatles game.
If the import/export situation is such a big, big, big deal, then don't buy the fucking thing. The objections that are being argued against is that B:RB is somehow ruining the RB franchise. And that's the Chicken Little bullshit being argued against.
You're muckin' with a G!
What do you mean by "the virtue..."? How is it "fundamentally unrelated"? What are the fundamental aspects of a Rock Band game?
1. Made by Harmonix - Check
2. Is based around an idea of simulated music performance - Check
3. Maintains visual coherence between Rock Band platforms - Check
4. Demonstrates strong support for the bands involved and consumers through DLC - Check
5. Has charts that are arguably better than the competition's - Maybe/NA (GH won't have Beatles, will they?)
6. Allows content cross-compatibility between Rock Band platforms - No.
Seems fundamentally related to me.
I said in an earlier post that I'm not getting the thing at launch because of the reasons I've been posting about. It's an incredibly disappointing thing to hear. As well, if it comes out that Lego Rock Band (because it's being developed outside of HMX or something) won't support import/export and won't work with my existing song catalog then I won't get that, either.
B:RB isn't ruining the franchise, but it's driving loyal customers away. I'm not even on the extreme end, I'd hate to be the guy with 85% of the DLC released so far only to hear that at least one new Rock Band title won't support the thing I've spent large amounts of money on. If Rock Band is losing the "music platform" aspect from RB1 and RB2 that made it such a fundamentally sound purchase over GH3 and GHWT then why not play GH?
Now, I certainly hope that Lego Rock Band works with my RB1/RB2 content and vice-versa (that LRB songs can be imported and played in RB2/RB1). If it doesn't, well, I'm not going to get that either and will continue to support HMX in the venues I currently do by buying DLC that looks fun.
I'm not saying "HMX is doomed because I can't play Run To THe Hills with the Beatles", I'm saying that B:RB is an unattractive purchase for me for the same reason GH5 is. I've already spent so much money on DLC, importing RB1 songs, and the AC/DC track pack that I really have no reason to get B:RB if it doesn't work with that content. Similarly, GH5 doesn't work with the songs I've got and so holds no appeal to me. I don't understand why this is such an unreasonable stance.
At Meta:
For me, there's not a lot of difference between HMX and Neversoft. They're both companies composed of cool people, and (at least with GHWT) they seem to both make really fun products. I support HMX pretty much because RB has a wider depth of song choices than the GH franchise, though GH has a lot of bands that I dig.
The virtue of the Rock Band liscense to me is the same as when I purchased RB1 in 07 and RB2 last year. When I get a Rock Band game, that content will work in other Rock Band games, meaning that each is a consumer choice. Lego Rock Band will be awesome if I can do things like play 'tallica or Maiden with Lego dudes due to DLC I already have, but if I can't then it's just another ~40 song game and if I really wanted to hear the music I could get it a lot more cheaply than buy purchasing a $60 video game. B:RB, at least, is taking this road and I'm fine with that, it just means that if I want to enjoy some Beatles tunes I'll buy them off iTunes or something.
When I say fundamentally unrelated, it's also in reference to the "Rock Band as platform" idea that was pushed heavily with RB1 and RB2. If The Beatles: Rock Band were made by Neversoft and called Guitar Hero: Rock Band, you know what would be different? Essentially nothing. 5 button guitars, a slightly more complicated drum setup, and a slightly different singing implementation.
When it comes to gameplay, there is almost no real difference between RB and GH. They play almost exactly the same (though RB has a FAR superior star power implementation, in my opinion) and so then it comes down to song selection. Right now, Rock Band kicks the hell out of GH in that area because of the import/export and cross compatibility features. GHWT has only been releasing DLC songs since late last year, but not only did RB2 launch with 84 songs it had access to nearly all of the RB1 songs and ALL of the RB1 DLC!
The Beatles: Rock Band is foregoing this for several extremely good reasons, but at the same time it's removing my impetus to purchase it. If the game does not access the content I have, then it's no different than GH5 or any other game that doesn't recognize my existing RB content.