I feel for Harmonix. There's probably more money in band games than DLC (I mean really, who here has played with or talked to people that haven't downloaded a single paid track). Of course, then they also run the risk of annoying the DLC dedicated and over saturating the market with rhythm games.
There IS more money in disc releases. Internet adoption is still nowhere near 100%.
Basically the pool gets smaller.
You can sell DLC only to people with internet.
Those people with internet that have hooked their consoles up to it.
Those people that have hooked it up and know the DLC exists.
Those people that have hooked it up, know it exists, and actually likes the DLC.
People that do all that and actually have the space for them.
Disc releases, people will pick them up if 'enough' songs are on there that they like, and as a result they pay for other tracks that they otherwise would have not bought or considered.
So far though, I am pleased with Green Day Rock Band. It's still part of the 'platform', we can export it, and Beatles still remains the only standalone RB game.
It's also running on the Beatles engine, so we can expect if we're getting RB3 as the 'base' game for next year, we'll get all of the Beatles improvements.
FyreWulff on
0
JC of DII think we're fucked up.I know I am.Registered Userregular
edited December 2009
So uhh, any suggestions on how Rock Band can be modified to let Stevie Wonder and other blind people play it?
My brother got me a wired xbox Explorer controller for my birthday the other day. That is particularly awesome, since I actually have a couple of the games, that I bought for my girlfriend along with the microphone
Yeah, I'm pretty sure that qualifies as doing it wrong.
I have both Rock Band 2 and Guitar Hero 5. Anything else that's really worth getting? Can I import Rock Band 1, Beatles: Rock Band and Beatles: Rock Band songs? They might be worth a rent, then.
Wow, Green Day? Major yawn. I won't blame Harmonix, since this is apparently the label's fault. Yeah, this is a definite pass for me. I think RB3 would have been a much better announcement.
At least the positive part of it being a separate disc and exportable is that it'll eventually hit bargain bins and I can save money on it. Thinking about it now, I was initially upset about not being able to delete any of this big export packs, like the 20 free songs or ac/dc, but realistically I don't typically play many random setlists anymore, which was my main reservation.
The only reason I'm disappointed in Green Day being a standalone disc is that it shuts down any chances of these songs being plain ol' DLC packs. A full album Dookie for $16 or a No Doubt/Who superpack would have been a buy for me, but now I have to wait until the disc hits the $15-ish price. I'm assuming it'll follow LEgo RB and have a separate export fee to boot.
Other parts of the Internet are, as expected, crawing about HMX selling out and Activisionish greed. I'll still be excited about weekly DLC and RBN, but I'm just sad I don't have any Green Day (or Green Day that I'd want, anyway) to look forward to.
I'm surprised people still think HMX is at fault. Labels are still insistent on physical media. Especially Warner which is why Metallica was a stand alone release (Do you wonder why there hasn't been any more DLC from them?).
Like Lunker said, I see this as a good thing since you'll be able to export it in the future for most likely less than what this would have been as DLC (The main reason why I'm not on board with complete digital distribution).
I'm not ready to pass judgment on this announcement. But seriously, how many GH/RB band specific games do we really need?
On the other hand, if Harmonix/MTV/EA is handling this game and not handing it over to some other developer to cock it up with their bullshit (i.e. Lego Rock Band), then it could turn out to be pretty solid.
I'm not sold on Green Day, never have. For me, they have a really bad pattern of releasing a bland album after releasing a good one.
it's release date is supposedly Fall according to sources.
So it looks like Harmonix will be doing a pattern of 'base game' 'band game' each year. Which I can deal with, and certainly isn't a flood nor requires outsourcing.
So far:
2007: Rock Band
2008: Rock Band 2
2009: Beatles (band) Lego (base)
2010: Green Day (band) RB3? (base)
I wouldn't have said that constitutes a pattern. Besides, Lego was outsourced.
Willeth on
@vgreminders - Don't miss out on timed events in gaming! @gamefacts - Totally and utterly true gaming facts on the regular!
I'm surprised people still think HMX is at fault. Labels are still insistent on physical media. Especially Warner which is why Metallica was a stand alone release (Do you wonder why there hasn't been any more DLC from them?).
Like Lunker said, I see this as a good thing since you'll be able to export it in the future for most likely less than what this would have been as DLC (The main reason why I'm not on board with complete digital distribution).
Well, people will bitch about anything. And this just makes that 'fanboys' devoted to the HMX idea upset because it's basically one more thing that sort of...levels the playing field.
RB3 has always been rumoured to be in the early part of the year. It's just that some people can't get over the idea of a game not being released near Christmas or thinking that RB1 releasing in November and RB2 in September/October suggests a pattern.
This is the best music video game-related news I've heard since I found out there's a lego David Bowie in Lego Rock Band. I am so gonna purchase Green Day: Rock Band the day it comes out.
My problem with Green Day: Rock Band is that they don't seem like a band who has earned that sort of thing. With the other bands who have had stand-alone games so far, even if I didn't like them, they seemed like bands that it made sense to have games for. Green Day just aren't on the same level as The Beatles and Metallica, or even Aerosmith and Van Halen.
Also, on a different point, I am very surprised that we haven't seen any Michael Jackson DLC yet (though I'm guessing the songs are probably tangled up in legal disputes or something).
I certainally think Green Day are better than Aerosmith and Van Halen. As for Metallica, it depends. Are we talking about old Metallica or new Metallica?
I love Green Day, so this is great news for me. The only things that would make me happier would be a RatM game, Prince DLC, or Michael Jackson DLC.
Oh god. I would buy the shit out of some Prince DLC. Too bad he went crazy.
'Went crazy' implies he used to be sane.
Well it's more that he swung from hedonist crazy to religious crazy. Don't count out a Prince game or track pack though. Much of his work that everyone knows is still owned or controlled by Warner Brothers. If Harmonix or Activision gave them enough money hats, I'd bet they'd get into GH or RB.
I certainally think Green Day are better than Aerosmith and Van Halen. As for Metallica, it depends. Are we talking about old Metallica or new Metallica?
Also, like, that's your opinion man. (And mine.)
Obviously this is just opinion, but even though I don't really like Aerosmith or Van Halen, they just seem like they're on a higher level than Green Day. A large part of that is no doubt simply because they've been around longer. For example, I love the Foo Fighters, but they haven't been around long enough to warrant their own band-specific game either.
As for Metallica, I'm talking about Metallica, taking their entire catalog into consideration. I do think their early material was the best, but there was some good material on Load/Reload (mainly Load).
My problem with Green Day: Rock Band is that they don't seem like a band who has earned that sort of thing. With the other bands who have had stand-alone games so far, even if I didn't like them, they seemed like bands that it made sense to have games for. Green Day just aren't on the same level as The Beatles and Metallica, or even Aerosmith and Van Halen.
Who ever said it was something that had to be earned? It's about making money, and this will make tons of it.
My problem with Green Day: Rock Band is that they don't seem like a band who has earned that sort of thing. With the other bands who have had stand-alone games so far, even if I didn't like them, they seemed like bands that it made sense to have games for. Green Day just aren't on the same level as The Beatles and Metallica, or even Aerosmith and Van Halen.
Who ever said it was something that had to be earned? It's about making money, and this will make tons of it.
and me getting songs I would have bought anyway, even if it costs a little more overall
My problem with Green Day: Rock Band is that they don't seem like a band who has earned that sort of thing. With the other bands who have had stand-alone games so far, even if I didn't like them, they seemed like bands that it made sense to have games for. Green Day just aren't on the same level as The Beatles and Metallica, or even Aerosmith and Van Halen.
Who ever said it was something that had to be earned? It's about making money, and this will make tons of it.
Earned means 'something I like better (or at all)'.
So, I know we had a few Devin Townsend fans in this thread, I remember talking about it when I posted a bit of an interview where he said he would like to be in Rock Band. Well, on Twitter, someone said he should get in touch with Harmonix about getting his music in the game. His response:
I would love to have something on Rock Band, the company is called Harmonix? I'll try...worth a shot.
Harmonix, the ball is now in your court. Devin owns all the rights to his music, so it's all on you! MAKE IT HAPPEN.
My problem with Green Day: Rock Band is that they don't seem like a band who has earned that sort of thing. With the other bands who have had stand-alone games so far, even if I didn't like them, they seemed like bands that it made sense to have games for. Green Day just aren't on the same level as The Beatles and Metallica, or even Aerosmith and Van Halen.
Who ever said it was something that had to be earned? It's about making money, and this will make tons of it.
Earned means 'something I like better (or at all)'.
No, it means that the bands who have gotten their own games before have a very definite place in rock history, whether you like them or not (for example, I don't like Aerosmith, but I will admit that they have a place in rock history). Green Day hasn't earned that kind of position in rock history yet, by any stretch.
As I said in my first example, I love the Foo Fighters, but they haven't earned it yet either.
TubularLuggage on
0
KorKnown to detonate from time to timeRegistered Userregular
edited December 2009
I remember saying/thinking that I wanted green day in rock band, and when I went to youtube to go pick out some of their older stuff, I realized that the guitar parts are all awful, as its something like the same 4-6 notes repeating over and over again.
The fact that everyone points to Dookie as "the good" Green Day album already means that they have earned a place in rock history.
But not in the same way that bands like the Beatles and Led Zeppelin have.
All your statement proves is that they have multiple albums, with one being better than the others.
The fact that everyone points to Dookie as "the good" Green Day album already means that they have earned a place in rock history.
But not in the same way that bands like the Beatles and Led Zeppelin have.
All your statement proves is that they have multiple albums, with one being better than the others.
Well of course not. Don't be ridiculous.
But the fact remains that they released an album that was an absolute critical darling and also sold over 15 million copies.
They have earned a place in rock history.
If you want to wait another twenty years to see that fact, be my guest.
UnbreakableVow on
0
KorKnown to detonate from time to timeRegistered Userregular
edited December 2009
I just feel like Green Day has sort of... overstayed their welcome. It's almost creepy to see guys that look that old trying to dress that young.
Is it safe to assume the game will be exclusively Green Day, or is there a possibility they'll branch out to related bands? I would buy a copy of Green Day Rock Band if it meant I finally got some Pansy Division songs.
LoveIsUnity on
0
KetarCome on upstairswe're having a partyRegistered Userregular
The fact that everyone points to Dookie as "the good" Green Day album already means that they have earned a place in rock history.
But not in the same way that bands like the Beatles and Led Zeppelin have.
All your statement proves is that they have multiple albums, with one being better than the others.
Well of course not. Don't be ridiculous.
But the fact remains that they released an album that was an absolute critical darling and also sold over 15 million copies.
They have earned a place in rock history.
If you want to wait another twenty years to see that fact, be my guest.
The best selling album of the 2000s was No Strings Attached by 'N Sync. Have they earned their own game?
Best selling album of the 2000s by a "rock" group is Human Clay, by Creed, clocking in at 5th best selling album of the decade.
Next rock artist to come up is Santana with Supernatural at 9th, and then All the Right Reasons by Nickelback at 13th. Well, unless you want to count Lincoln Park as rock-ish with Hybrid Theory at 11th.
After that it's Limp Bizkit with Chocolate Starfish and the Epically Shitty Album Title at 18th, and Fallen by Evanescence at 19th to round out the rock or rock-like albums in the top 20 for the decade.
Music is probably the one industry, above all others, where sales are a piss-poor measurement of quality or worth.
Posts
@gamefacts - Totally and utterly true gaming facts on the regular!
Basically the pool gets smaller.
You can sell DLC only to people with internet.
Those people with internet that have hooked their consoles up to it.
Those people that have hooked it up and know the DLC exists.
Those people that have hooked it up, know it exists, and actually likes the DLC.
People that do all that and actually have the space for them.
Disc releases, people will pick them up if 'enough' songs are on there that they like, and as a result they pay for other tracks that they otherwise would have not bought or considered.
So far though, I am pleased with Green Day Rock Band. It's still part of the 'platform', we can export it, and Beatles still remains the only standalone RB game.
It's also running on the Beatles engine, so we can expect if we're getting RB3 as the 'base' game for next year, we'll get all of the Beatles improvements.
Lego Rock Band is also all or nothing.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure that qualifies as doing it wrong.
I have both Rock Band 2 and Guitar Hero 5. Anything else that's really worth getting? Can I import Rock Band 1, Beatles: Rock Band and Beatles: Rock Band songs? They might be worth a rent, then.
edit: so much for my reading skills.
The only reason I'm disappointed in Green Day being a standalone disc is that it shuts down any chances of these songs being plain ol' DLC packs. A full album Dookie for $16 or a No Doubt/Who superpack would have been a buy for me, but now I have to wait until the disc hits the $15-ish price. I'm assuming it'll follow LEgo RB and have a separate export fee to boot.
Other parts of the Internet are, as expected, crawing about HMX selling out and Activisionish greed. I'll still be excited about weekly DLC and RBN, but I'm just sad I don't have any Green Day (or Green Day that I'd want, anyway) to look forward to.
Like Lunker said, I see this as a good thing since you'll be able to export it in the future for most likely less than what this would have been as DLC (The main reason why I'm not on board with complete digital distribution).
I wouldn't have said that constitutes a pattern. Besides, Lego was outsourced.
@gamefacts - Totally and utterly true gaming facts on the regular!
Well, people will bitch about anything. And this just makes that 'fanboys' devoted to the HMX idea upset because it's basically one more thing that sort of...levels the playing field.
Steam
All the track packs are all-or-nothing.
The only export that lets you delete specific tracks after doing so is Rock Band 1.
Oh god. I would buy the shit out of some Prince DLC. Too bad he went crazy.
'Went crazy' implies he used to be sane.
Also, on a different point, I am very surprised that we haven't seen any Michael Jackson DLC yet (though I'm guessing the songs are probably tangled up in legal disputes or something).
Also, like, that's your opinion man. (And mine.)
// Switch: SW-5306-0651-6424 //
Well it's more that he swung from hedonist crazy to religious crazy. Don't count out a Prince game or track pack though. Much of his work that everyone knows is still owned or controlled by Warner Brothers. If Harmonix or Activision gave them enough money hats, I'd bet they'd get into GH or RB.
What else was he supposed to do? Let the elevator take him down?
Obviously this is just opinion, but even though I don't really like Aerosmith or Van Halen, they just seem like they're on a higher level than Green Day. A large part of that is no doubt simply because they've been around longer. For example, I love the Foo Fighters, but they haven't been around long enough to warrant their own band-specific game either.
As for Metallica, I'm talking about Metallica, taking their entire catalog into consideration. I do think their early material was the best, but there was some good material on Load/Reload (mainly Load).
Who ever said it was something that had to be earned? It's about making money, and this will make tons of it.
and me getting songs I would have bought anyway, even if it costs a little more overall
Earned means 'something I like better (or at all)'.
No, it means that the bands who have gotten their own games before have a very definite place in rock history, whether you like them or not (for example, I don't like Aerosmith, but I will admit that they have a place in rock history). Green Day hasn't earned that kind of position in rock history yet, by any stretch.
As I said in my first example, I love the Foo Fighters, but they haven't earned it yet either.
Pokemon Safari - Sneasel, Pawniard, ????
But not in the same way that bands like the Beatles and Led Zeppelin have.
All your statement proves is that they have multiple albums, with one being better than the others.
Well of course not. Don't be ridiculous.
But the fact remains that they released an album that was an absolute critical darling and also sold over 15 million copies.
They have earned a place in rock history.
If you want to wait another twenty years to see that fact, be my guest.
Pokemon Safari - Sneasel, Pawniard, ????
Note to self - when I get old I need to start wearing checkered polo shirts and cream slacks with suspenders, not what I'm comfortable wearing.
The best selling album of the 2000s was No Strings Attached by 'N Sync. Have they earned their own game?
Best selling album of the 2000s by a "rock" group is Human Clay, by Creed, clocking in at 5th best selling album of the decade.
Next rock artist to come up is Santana with Supernatural at 9th, and then All the Right Reasons by Nickelback at 13th. Well, unless you want to count Lincoln Park as rock-ish with Hybrid Theory at 11th.
After that it's Limp Bizkit with Chocolate Starfish and the Epically Shitty Album Title at 18th, and Fallen by Evanescence at 19th to round out the rock or rock-like albums in the top 20 for the decade.
Music is probably the one industry, above all others, where sales are a piss-poor measurement of quality or worth.
All those people you just mentioned, shitty as some of them might be in my own eyes, have also earned their spot in music history.
Whether or not they'll be looked back at with reverence is an altogether entirely different matter, but they'll certainly be remembered.