Why it's good TB:RB is standalone

jeccanekojeccaneko Headliner
edited June 2009 in The Beatles: Rock Band
I've seen some people complain about the fact The Beatles: Rock Band is not exportable, you can't play current RB DLC on it, and it'll only worth with Beatles DLC. Well, here's a few reasons it's good that it is standalone!

tl;dr people can just read the stuff in bold to get my point.

1) If Rock Band 2 (and its DLC) was exportable to The Beatles: Rock Band, that would fracture the community. You would have some people playing on RB2, some playing on TB:RB, and that would kill the whole platform concept that I am convinced HMX still wants to keep.

2) If The Beatles: Rock Band (and its DLC) was exportable to Rock Band 2, it would not support harmonies. The RB2 engine simply is not programmed to do this. Thus it would kill part of the fun of playing these songs.

3) The Beatles: Rock Band will most likely help the RB platform grow. The Beatles will inspire people to pick up TB:RB. That might get people so into it they want to get into the main game. If the main game's DLC was supported in TB:RB, it would not encourage converts and you'd still have that community fracturing like I mentioned in #1.

4) The Beatles: Rock Band is a whole new game, just with Rock Band gameplay. It is meant to give you the whole Beatles experience. It is NOT meant to be traditional sort of Rock Band. That's why you don't have your own characters. That's why you go to famous Beatles-related locations, the dreamscapes, etc.

TB:RB is not meant to be part of the platform. I think part of it might be for licensing reasons (only way HMX could get the songs), part of it for technical limitations, and part of it for that experience HMX wanted to give people.

I understand that some people are disappointed that it is not exportable. If things like The Beatles themselves, the harmonies, the whole experience HMX put into the game... if those don't interest you, then perhaps this game isn't for you.

This game is not meant to be an expansion pack. It is not meant to be Rock Band as we know it.

I'm done now.

Comments

  • RMThompsonRMThompson Opening Act
    edited June 2009
    Great answers to a seemingly overzealous fanboy attack.

    It just simply doesn't make sense.
  • cherokeesamcherokeesam Washed Up
    edited June 2009
    1) If Rock Band 2 (and its DLC) was exportable to The Beatles: Rock Band, that would fracture the community. You would have some people playing on RB2, some playing on TB:RB, and that would kill the whole platform concept that I am convinced HMX still wants to keep.
    Whereas if TBRB was exportable to RB, the community would remain INTACT, and people would be jamming to The Beatles in their setlists as well as all the rest of the bands.
    2) If The Beatles: Rock Band (and its DLC) was exportable to Rock Band 2, it would not support harmonies. The RB2 engine simply is not programmed to do this. Thus it would kill part of the fun of playing these songs.
    You can still play The Beatles just as well in traditional Bass-Guitar-Drums-Vox mode without having to sing harmonies. But the rest of the band could still feel free to sing along.
    3) The Beatles: Rock Band will most likely help the RB platform grow. The Beatles will inspire people to pick up TB:RB. That might get people so into it they want to get into the main game. If the main game's DLC was supported in TB:RB, it would not encourage converts and you'd still have that community fracturing like I mentioned in #1.
    And if/when TBRB "converts" come to RB2 and find out that they'll have to leave their precious Beatles setlists behind on a separate disc, they're not likely to be pleased. At all.
    4) The Beatles: Rock Band is a whole new game, just with Rock Band gameplay. It is meant to give you the whole Beatles experience. It is NOT meant to be traditional sort of Rock Band. That's why you don't have your own characters. That's why you go to famous Beatles-related locations, the dreamscapes, etc.
    Yup, just like in GHAerosmith and GHMetallica.
    Which I recall these same HMX fanboys lambasting for *precisely* the same limitations that TBRB is now saddled with.
    TB:RB is not meant to be part of the platform. I think part of it might be for licensing reasons (only way HMX could get the songs), part of it for technical limitations, and part of it for that experience HMX wanted to give people.
    Or, it could be simply that The Beatles are arrogant, selfish bastards who don't want to mix with the "hoi polloi" of Rock Band (bands like The Who, Bob Dylan, The Rolling Stones, CCR, The Zombies....I mean, can you *imagine*? *tsk* :rolleyes: )
    I understand that some people are disappointed that it is not exportable. If things like The Beatles themselves, the harmonies, the whole experience HMX put into the game... if those don't interest you, then perhaps this game isn't for you.
    They do interest me. Long enough to rent it for the few hours it'll take to complete the career mode. Then it's back to Blockbuster, and I'm back to playing RB and supporting the whole music platform idea that seems to have fallen on the backburner at HMX.
    This game is not meant to be an expansion pack. It is not meant to be Rock Band as we know it.
    Yup....just like Aerosmith and Metallica are "not meant to be expansion packs." And yet....they ARE expansion packs. Just like TB:RB.
    I'm done now.
    Me too. :)
  • SojaSoja Road Warrior
    edited June 2009
    An honorable intent, Jecca, but those who want to ***** about it will ***** about it regardless of merit or reason.
  • jeccanekojeccaneko Headliner
    edited June 2009
    cherokeesam;2535383 said:
    Whereas if TBRB was exportable to RB, the community would remain INTACT, and people would be jamming to The Beatles in their setlists as well as all the rest of the bands.
    That is true. But I wonder if this is partly a licensing issue other than a technical one (harmonies). I did mention that at one point.
    You can still play The Beatles just as well in traditional Bass-Guitar-Drums-Vox mode without having to sing harmonies. But the rest of the band could still feel free to sing along.
    Yes, but it doesn't do anything for the game. When I play bass I already do backup vocals unofficially. The harmonies is an advertised feature of TB:RB.
    And if/when TBRB "converts" come to RB2 and find out that they'll have to leave their precious Beatles setlists behind on a separate disc, they're not likely to be pleased. At all.
    Not necessarily. You forget us Rock Band players are spoiled. Before RB1's export, no music game ever exported before.
    Yup, just like in GHAerosmith and GHMetallica.
    Which I recall these same HMX fanboys lambasting for *precisely* the same limitations that TBRB is now saddled with.
    Those are expansion packs. They work EXACTLY the same as the games they are using the engines of (GH:A being GH3's engine and GH:M being GHWT's engine). There are no limitations other than perhaps licensing and the fact that Activision/Neversoft is trying to make you buy the disc. That is their business philsophy, to sell discs. You can see this in the way they choose to put out a ton of GH games and not really being serious about releasing DLC.
    Or, it could be simply that The Beatles are arrogant, selfish bastards who don't want to mix with the "hoi polloi" of Rock Band (bands like The Who, Bob Dylan, The Rolling Stones, CCR, The Zombies....I mean, can you *imagine*? *tsk* :rolleyes: )
    I know. I meant this in the licensing bit.
    They do interest me. Long enough to rent it for the few hours it'll take to complete the career mode. Then it's back to Blockbuster, and I'm back to playing RB and supporting the whole music platform idea that seems to have fallen on the backburner at HMX.
    It's not supposed to be part of the platform. It's a different game, just given the RB name for marketing reasons.
    Yup....just like Aerosmith and Metallica are "not meant to be expansion packs." And yet....they ARE expansion packs. Just like TB:RB.
    I discussed this above.

    I'm not trying to attack anybody who is disappointed, like you obviously are cherokeesam. I am just pointing these things out. I understand you're upset. I was at first too.

    I don't consider myself an HMX fangirl by any means. I do not buy any video game just based on the fact a certain developer makes it (well, I do this for one developer only nowadays - that's Bioware though). In fact, I was still on the fence about this game and extremely iffy about it until I saw how the game played thanks to E3 videos. I don't even really know many Beatles songs but it looks fun to me.

    I'm still a little disappointed I can't play these songs when I play the other ones, but as a music game fan I will say, again, that we are spoiled by the fact RB1 exported and that HMX has supported the platform. All other music games make their bucks by selling more discs. You are forced to disc swap. I've got hundreds of DDR songs over PS1 and PS2, but guess what? They're spread over about 10 discs! This is common for music games.
  • cherokeesamcherokeesam Washed Up
    edited June 2009
    We may be "spoiled," but that's nobody's fault but HMX's. They're the ones who championed the unified platform; they're the ones who (rightfully) bragged about being the ones who let you bring your setlist from the original over to the sequel.

    You can't blame us for believing HMX's promises, can you? If that makes us gullible for actually believing HMX when they said they'd never make a standalone band game, or deviate from the core platform, then what does that make those of you who blindly believe everything HMX is now promising you in TBRB, or Lego, or anything else?
  • Super BassSuper Bass Opening Act
    edited June 2009
    I think I'll throw in my perspective before the angry kids tear you to shreds (unfortunately :().
    jeccaneko;2535323 said:
    I've seen some people complain about the fact The Beatles: Rock Band is not exportable, you can't play current RB DLC on it, and it'll only worth with Beatles DLC. Well, here's a few reasons it's good that it is standalone!

    tl;dr people can just read the stuff in bold to get my point.

    1) If Rock Band 2 (and its DLC) was exportable to The Beatles: Rock Band, that would fracture the community. You would have some people playing on RB2, some playing on TB:RB, and that would kill the whole platform concept that I am convinced HMX still wants to keep.
    Technically, this game WILL fracture part of the community (I expect MOST of the people that end up buying this game will be new to Rock Band). If people aren't playing RB2, they'll be playing TB:RB (so, either way, unless you ALSO have a copy of TB:RB, you won't be able to play with those individuals for a while--a least a month before the initial novelty wears off for them).

    And anyone who thought the RB2 stuff would be playable on this game:

    :p

    Which brings me to:
    2) If The Beatles: Rock Band (and its DLC) was exportable to Rock Band 2, it would not support harmonies. The RB2 engine simply is not programmed to do this. Thus it would kill part of the fun of playing these songs.
    The harmonies not being supported is a given (export or no export). IF there was an export, that would at least be the ONE thing to keep people playing the Beatles disc--you can only do three-person harmonies on THAT game. As far as playing the songs in RB2, I don't see why that's not possible (like RB1 songs played in RB2). Minus the possible technological problems of the interface (which none of us knows about--good or bad), it comes down to one simple question:

    What happens when you only have ONE microphone?

    The same thing that happens when you only have ONE microphone in RB2. :cool:
    3) The Beatles: Rock Band will most likely help the RB platform grow. The Beatles will inspire people to pick up TB:RB. That might get people so into it they want to get into the main game. If the main game's DLC was supported in TB:RB, it would not encourage converts and you'd still have that community fracturing like I mentioned in #1.
    The problem is that once the new players to the platform have seen how great a game from HMX plays out, they'll realize that they can't play those Beatles tracks in RB2 or maybe even RB3 (things aren't DEFINITE, but all signs point to "when Hell freezes over"). They'll be all happy about the game and realize that it's JUST like Guitar Hero (some people HONESTLY don't know that there IS a difference between RB and GH). If the game had exportability, newcomers could experience The Beatles and then transfer the songs to RB2 to catch up to the same 84 songs and other DLC that many of us have been playing for a while.

    Show Grandma, Aunt Sue, or whoever, that the Harmonix brand is ONE great library of music that can be built up as time goes on.

    "Aunt Sue, if you liked the Beatles game, you can also play most of the RB1 songs along with them in RB2."

    Aunt Sue sees that she has bought a game from a company that is fleshing out great music to create a phenomenal gaming experience.

    However, without the export, Aunt Sue is stuck switching discs to play The Beatles (and without the export, she doesn't know that RB is a platform at ALL).
    4) The Beatles: Rock Band is a whole new game, just with Rock Band gameplay. It is meant to give you the whole Beatles experience. It is NOT meant to be traditional sort of Rock Band. That's why you don't have your own characters. That's why you go to famous Beatles-related locations, the dreamscapes, etc.
    I'm sure most people wanted to play AS The Beatles, but I ALSO think that they wanted to make sure that their $60 was well spent. I think the music ALONE is worth 60 bucks, but the experience...well I'm guessing the average Joe can beat the game in about six hours (and that's probably STRETCHING the game out). So is six hours worth $60? THAT question is quite subjective. If you're like me and you don't have anyone else that is even REMOTELY interested in singing (much less harmonizing), an export at LEAST numbs the sting to my wallet.
    TB:RB is not meant to be part of the platform. I think part of it might be for licensing reasons (only way HMX could get the songs), part of it for technical limitations, and part of it for that experience HMX wanted to give people

    My ONLY issue with this is that something wasn’t said before E3. Everyone is twisting the comment from last year, when we all learned that the Beatles game was “not a Rock Band game.” But since it sounds so vague, some people took that to mean “not RB3” instead of “not transferable to RB2.” I only wish that THAT had been clarified. People are now saying that Harmonix “said from the beginning that it would be a standalone,” but “not a Rock Band game” has more than one meaning. Harmonix DID NOT say that the game would be a standalone, but they ALSO didn’t say that it would export. One simple statement way back when (around…oh…October) would’ve softened the blow some felt last week and the crying wouldn’t be so bad (someone will ALWAYS be crying on the forums, but at least there would be less of it).

    I understand that some people are disappointed that it is not exportable. If things like The Beatles themselves, the harmonies, the whole experience HMX put into the game... if those don't interest you, then perhaps this game isn't for you.

    This game is not meant to be an expansion pack. It is not meant to be Rock Band as we know it.
    I think more people are thinking of the game as a 60-dollar rental, plain and simple. That’s why there’s such uproar. Add the fact that there is now separate DLC between two HMX titles and Harmonix has now fueled the fire for the people who stood by the “platform” mentality that they upheld. I think it sucks that all the songs can’t just be played in one game. I understand where everyone is coming from, and I think the no export issue is an important one.

    Will I buy the game? Sure…eventually. But right now it comes down to this:

    Do I want to spend $60 on at least 30 new DLC tracks that will be playable in all future RB titles (I hope)?

    OR

    Do I want to spend $60 on a game that I KNOW I will enjoy but will give me buyer’s remorse by the end of the first week?


    Without the export, I'm SERIOUSLY undecided (since I mostly play Rock Band 2 solo, the harmonies don't do anything for me—and I don’t even want to THINK about the online multiplayer on this thing compared to RB2) ?


    I'm done now.
    So am I. Great points!
  • SojaSoja Road Warrior
    edited June 2009
    cherokeesam;2535487 said:
    We may be "spoiled," but that's nobody's fault but HMX's. They're the ones who championed the unified platform; they're the ones who (rightfully) bragged about being the ones who let you bring your setlist from the original over to the sequel.

    You can't blame us for believing HMX's promises, can you? If that makes us gullible for actually believing HMX when they said they'd never make a standalone band game, or deviate from the core platform, then what does that make those of you who blindly believe everything HMX is now promising you in TBRB, or Lego, or anything else?
    Oh right, it's Harmonix's fault that we've become complacent and demanding in our expectations, even if it's not legally or agreeably possible. :rolleyes:

    I'm sure The Beatles would have gladly gone over to Nevervision's camp if Harmonix didn't make some concessions to their terms.

    And I don't see how you're still getting off on the 'no xportz' argument: FROM THE VERY BEGINNING, Harmonix said it was NOT going to HAPPEN.
  • cherokeesamcherokeesam Washed Up
    edited June 2009
    Soja;2535697 said:
    Oh right, it's Harmonix's fault that we've become complacent and demanding in our expectations, even if it's not legally or agreeably possible. :rolleyes:
    How would exportation be "legally impossible"? Was the export of RB1 to RB2, or AC/DC Live to RB2, or the pseudo-export (i.e., DLC to be released later) of "Unplugged" to RB2 "legally impossible?"
    I'm sure The Beatles would have gladly gone over to Nevervision's camp if Harmonix didn't make some concessions to their terms.
    And then we would've had Guitar Hero: The Beatles. Which, apart from crappier graphics and circles instead of rectangles on the song charts, would have been virtually identical to The Beatles: Rock Band in every way. i.e: standalone band game, non-exportable, 45-song short list, rent-don't-buy.
  • kiggidykevkiggidykev Thinks about pandas
    edited June 2009
    I'm sure it's a good idea in the long run, but my heart is still broken from not having it all on the same songlist. :(
  • SojaSoja Road Warrior
    edited June 2009
    cherokeesam;2535747 said:
    How would exportation be "legally impossible"? Was the export of RB1 to RB2, or AC/DC Live to RB2, or the pseudo-export (i.e., DLC to be released later) of "Unplugged" to RB2 "legally impossible?"
    Legally impossible because one of the consenting parties refused to offer up their catalog for that kind of distribution. Thus doing it would be a breach of contract, ugly lawsuit follows, et al.
    And then we would've had Guitar Hero: The Beatles. Which, apart from crappier graphics and circles instead of rectangles on the song charts, would have been virtually identical to The Beatles: Rock Band in every way. i.e: standalone band game, non-exportable, 45-song short list, rent-don't-buy.
    Doubtful. Nevervision's past few band games and one upcoming band game are pretty telling of how they would've handled it. They would've put in 25 Beatles tracks and then some Simple Plan and Rise Against. :rolleyes:

    Between the two companies, guess which one I would prefer to have this project in hand? The one that has, so far, given us a better product overall. And who knows if The Beatles and their estates may one day decide to allow pseudo-exportation, as you've called it, to a speculated future Rock Band release?

    Seeing how exportation from RB1 was handled, I can't imagine it being much different if TB:RB suddenly had its tune changed in a similar way.
  • MaximumJasonMaximumJason Opening Act
    edited June 2009
    One thought rings in my mind about this whole situation:

    Being a game designer, what is the most important thing about designing a game? MAKING SURE AS MANY PEOPLE LIKE IT AS POSSIBLE.

    If you don't give consumers good reasons to play your game, your company will not make sales.

    Not only this but would not the point of creating a sequel or follow up to a game be; TO MAKE IT BETTER THAN THE ORIGINAL?

    Excluding worth-while features from a new game does not make any sense unless it hurt the original in some game-breaking way. In this situation, they have failed to see how seriously this will impact their current customers and I believe it will really hurt them in the long run with this release.
  • aspushkinaspushkin Opening Act
    edited June 2009
    Ah... GH... the useful idiot. Any time anyone levels the mildest critique or offers any sort of constructive criticism it's so easy to just say "But GH is much, much worse!"
  • DMBilliesDMBillies Road Warrior
    edited June 2009
    Super Bass... I agree with you on just about every point you've made and I think the majority of the OP's points are refutable. Below is what I think is the most important thing you posted...
    Super Bass;2535676 said:

    The problem is that once the new players to the platform have seen how great a game from HMX plays out, they'll realize that they can't play those Beatles tracks in RB2 or maybe even RB3 (things aren't DEFINITE, but all signs point to "when Hell freezes over"). They'll be all happy about the game and realize that it's JUST like Guitar Hero (some people HONESTLY don't know that there IS a difference between RB and GH). If the game had exportability, newcomers could experience The Beatles and then transfer the songs to RB2 to catch up to the same 84 songs and other DLC that many of us have been playing for a while.

    Show Grandma, Aunt Sue, or whoever, that the Harmonix brand is ONE great library of music that can be built up as time goes on.

    "Aunt Sue, if you liked the Beatles game, you can also play most of the RB1 songs along with them in RB2."

    Aunt Sue sees that she has bought a game from a company that is fleshing out great music to create a phenomenal gaming experience.

    However, without the export, Aunt Sue is stuck switching discs to play The Beatles (and without the export, she doesn't know that RB is a platform at ALL).
    HMX is in direct competition with GH. HMX gets a huge band that will attract a ton of new people to their platform and give HMX a chance to show everyone that RB is not only NOT GH Hero, but it is better. What is one thing that make RB better than GH? The ability to play all DLC and other RB releases all in one place and to cherry pick through a freakin' huge selection of DLC.

    Instead HMX makes the game standalone. "Aunt Sue" doesn't see that huge collection of music in the store (if Aunt Sue does, she might say, "omg... I can get The Who, Rush, and I think Dierks Bentley is dreamy). The end result is that Aunt Sue doesn't get a chance to experience the genius that is the platform approach AT ALL.

    I've said before... a platform is a better approach, it just takes time for the size of that platform to become big enough that it cannot be ignored, it takes time (and some marketing) for people to know that they can even export, it takes time for people to learn that one major way RB is different from GH is in their approach to DLC/exports. I'd say with GH saturating the market with standalone games and RB about to put out two games that reach for new markets and could have added another 100+ songs to the platform ... the time for the platform approach to come into it's own and for HMX to distance themselves from the shadow of the GH name was just about here.
  • ScottWARScottWAR Banned
    edited June 2009
    I chose Rockband over Guitar Hero for two reasons and two reasons alone.
    1- Compatibility.
    2- DLC also with compatibility

    Now with the release of this game, I no longer have #1. Any money I spend on RB:TB will be wasted as soon as I stop playing RB:TB and go back to playing RB simply becasue of VARIETY,....which is where #2 comes in. I trusted HMX in their promise of commitment to a platform,.....believing I wouldnt be wasting my money with songs that wouldnt be playable from 1 game to the next and DLC that would work on all games in the platform,...but yet here we are with HMX doing the exact opposite of what they promised.
  • quinakingquinaking Road Warrior
    edited June 2009
    jeccaneko;2535323 said:
    1) If Rock Band 2 (and its DLC) was exportable to The Beatles: Rock Band, that would fracture the community. You would have some people playing on RB2, some playing on TB:RB, and that would kill the whole platform concept that I am convinced HMX still wants to keep.
    Dead wrong. If we had Rock Band 2 exportable to The Beatles we'd have all of our songs in there as well as DLC and Rock Band 1. The Rock Band crowd would follow into The Beatles for the new features. Having them on two separate games will separate the community. This is the only one of your points I disagree with. I don't think it's a good thing that it doesn't export, if it were up to me I'd make Rock Band 2 export to The Beatles so we can play the songs in quickplay regardless. I understand why it won't happen at all but I respect Harmonix is going to take that much of a chance on this. Though it is for the alleged most popular band ever.
  • JackBNimbleJackBNimble Road Warrior
    edited June 2009
    kiggidykev;2535752 said:
    I'm sure it's a good idea in the long run, but my heart is still broken from not having it all on the same songlist. :(
    I think you got that backwards.
    A good idea for the short run (ya know, untill it's been completed a few times).

    Bad idea for the long run ( ya know when the novelty wears off) and you just want to play a few Beatles songs with the rest of your music.
  • princeofcupsprinceofcups Road Warrior
    edited June 2009
    MaximumJason;2535827 said:

    Excluding worth-while features from a new game does not make any sense unless it hurt the original in some game-breaking way. In this situation, they have failed to see how seriously this will impact their current customers and I believe it will really hurt them in the long run with this release.
    Agreed. HMX (whoever is making the decisions these days) has gotten caught up in their own Beatles fan-boyism, and forgot about the fans who enjoy playing RB, not a simulation of the lives of the Beatles.
  • username7410username7410 Unsigned
    edited June 2009
    I bought a Rock Band 2 bundle BECAUSE of TB:RB... didn't want to wait to get practiced on drums, and using teh Rock Band guitar. So, I bought it now! Wouldn't have if I didn't have the TB:RB forthcoming. Enjoying everything else Rock Band until then.
  • princeofcupsprinceofcups Road Warrior
    edited June 2009
    Soja;2535697 said:

    I'm sure The Beatles would have gladly gone over to Nevervision's camp if Harmonix didn't make some concessions to their terms.
    So why make the game at all? The Beatles are just one band. I won't argue about their status or their influence or their popularity, but they are just one band. There are 100 great songs out there for every great Beatles song.

    GHWT is still the lesser game. But at least they are adding features, making changes for the better, and giving the fans something to look forward to. RB3 will be competing with GHWT 6, and 5 has already closed the playability gap.

    I say these things because I want RB to succeed. I have a lot invested in it. However, they are not getting much more DLC money out of me until we get some idea of where the platform is going. I don't want to convert over to other guys come next fall.
  • chuckinchuckin Unsigned
    edited June 2009
    jeccaneko;2535446 said:
    I'm still a little disappointed I can't play these songs when I play the other ones, but as a music game fan I will say, again, that we are spoiled by the fact RB1 exported and that HMX has supported the platform. All other music games make their bucks by selling more discs. You are forced to disc swap. I've got hundreds of DDR songs over PS1 and PS2, but guess what? They're spread over about 10 discs! This is common for music games.
    Spoiled? Maybe if RockBand had a monopoly on the rhythm game market, but last I checked there was this franchise called Guitar Hero. The best thing about competition is it breeds innovation, that's because innovation increases demand. If there were no innovation we'd all be thanking the Guitar Hero gods for blessing us with The Beatles:Guitar Hero, not to mention the game would only be played on plastic guitars with no vocal harmonies or special pearl colored drums (this is assuming RockBand didn't exist - clever huh?).

    The fact that this game is being put out with RockBand in the name is meaningless to me because at the end of the day it's only going to be a rental. I'd consider buying RockBand:Abnormality if it had exportability, but I guess I'm spoiled.

    Purchasing TB:RB is only showing your support for more of the same backward thinking or maybe you're just a huge fan with a lot of spare cash - if this is the case I don't blame you. What I'm really trying to say is I wish everyone would just rent the game to show the powers that be that this non-exportability issue is a clear step backward for innovation.
  • LoopyChewLoopyChew Wordsmith
    edited June 2009
    While I am disappointed about the lack of exportability (and I would've been perfectly happy if the exported version of Beatles songs didn't have harmony support), I also understand that The Beatles are very controlling of their rights, and that sometimes you have to make a deal with the devil (Yoko, Apple, Michael Jackson) in order to produce something you love.

    Looking at the game at this stage, it's obvious that it's a labor of love. It's wonderful, it's marvelous, it looks like it'll be happiness in a box.

    I just wish it were compatible with that other bit of happiness in a box, or, barring that, they didn't try to share its name, which (at least to me) implied the possibility of only requiring one box for happiness. that's what she said

    I don't have any hopes pinned on either the game itself or its DLC becoming part of the RB platform any time soon--the amount of approval that HMX has to get for each individual track as is (from what it sounds like, regarding dreamscapes at the very least) tells you that the authoring of these tracks go through so much more red tape than typical DLC does--and, quite frankly, I'll probably end up playing RB2 more often than I am The Beatles. However, unlike the GH games, I probably actually will play this more often than not.

    As for the whole thing about how lack of compatibility is going to impact the market: it won't. The Beatles are The Beatles, and there are plenty of people willing to buy that game alone. Most of the mainstream doesn't care or mind--it's only the hardcore that are affected. HMX made the right business call, and although they had to compromise with the rights holders this time around, it's obvious they're doing what they can to make up for the things in which the game lacks.

    Still, the day they decide to tell me I'm dead wrong and that exportability suddenly becomes on the menu will be the day my nether regions explode with sunshine and butterflies.
  • NakedFeckersNakedFeckers Opening Act
    edited June 2009
    Holy sh*t. This might be the first thread where everyone is getting along and making valid points. I just read every post and all my points were already made.

    I won't buy The Beatles for two reason: 1. I don't like The Beatles 2. It won't export
    I might rent it though to check it out. Good thread.

    Harumph!!!
  • Julio_Strikes_BackJulio_Strikes_Back Headliner
    edited June 2009
    cherokeesam;2535487 said:
    We may be "spoiled," but that's nobody's fault but HMX's. They're the ones who championed the unified platform; they're the ones who (rightfully) bragged about being the ones who let you bring your setlist from the original over to the sequel.

    You can't blame us for believing HMX's promises, can you? If that makes us gullible for actually believing HMX when they said they'd never make a standalone band game, or deviate from the core platform, then what does that make those of you who blindly believe everything HMX is now promising you in TBRB, or Lego, or anything else?
    AC/DC was an expansion pack. Who tracks were an expansion pack. Beatles is its own sixty-dollar game.
  • ScottyTheBodyScottyTheBody Road Warrior
    edited June 2009
    This is sarcastic right? I can't even believe this is even being argued. Of course it's not as good that it's standalone.

    On one hand you have the game with all the features.

    On the other hand you have the game with all the features and an export feature. If you would like to export you can and if you want it to be standalone, don't export. Simple as that. Wouldn't people rather have the choice?

    I understand why the export is not EVER going to happen but to say that you wouldn't want it in the game is a little...brainwashed I guess?
  • T-HybridT-Hybrid Washed Up
    edited June 2009
    cherokeesam;2535383 said:
    Whereas if TBRB was exportable to RB, the community would remain INTACT, and people would be jamming to The Beatles in their setlists as well as all the rest of the bands.
    Why would the NEW game be exportable to the OLD game? If anything, RB2 should become exportable going forward. Or would you be the first in line whining when RB3 doesn't export to RB2?
    cherokeesam;2535383 said:
    And if/when TBRB "converts" come to RB2 and find out that they'll have to leave their precious Beatles setlists behind on a separate disc, they're not likely to be pleased. At all.
    Or they won't care...because they're "converts" and had no idea such an exportation option even existed.
    cherokeesam;2535383 said:
    Yup, just like in GHAerosmith and GHMetallica.
    Which I recall these same HMX fanboys lambasting for *precisely* the same limitations that TBRB is now saddled with.
    GHA and GHM don't compare favorably at all.

    1) About 25% of the setlists aren't even from those bands.
    2) Neither game supports DLC. So there's no way to expand the game once you've played out the disc songs.
    cherokeesam;2535383 said:
    Or, it could be simply that The Beatles are arrogant, selfish bastards who don't want to mix with the "hoi polloi" of Rock Band (bands like The Who, Bob Dylan, The Rolling Stones, CCR, The Zombies....I mean, can you *imagine*? *tsk* :rolleyes: )
    Except that we know how hard it is to get The Beatles to agree to license anything. They still aren't available for iTunes last I checked.

    And both Aerosmith and Metallica (and Van Halen) have provided music games with songs in the past...so there was no need for a full game simply to get them into the genre.

    I don't like the fact that they aren't exportable...but it's far beyond HMX's control this time around. Aerosmith and Metalliica? Not so much.

    If you want to whine to anybody about the lack of exportation, talk to The Beatles. Because they didn't allow it. And as we know from AC/DC Live, HMX is entirely able to bring the songs into the main series if the band is willing to work with them.
  • David2380David2380 Road Warrior
    edited June 2009
    There is nothing good about it being a stand alone game. I understand HMX probably had to do it this way to get the beatles and I do not blame them for doing it, but there is nothing good about it. Just look at the precedent set by the AC/DC track pack. I don't know the actual numbers but I'm sure it didn't sell half as well as if it were DLC that you can pick and chose which songs you wanted. I for 1 didn't buy the disc but wouldv'e bought 6-8 songs if it were dlc.I might pick it up if it ever becomes cheap enough that I think it is worth it for those songs alone. You were even able to transfder all the songs to the platform and it didn't sell as well. The beatles game will definitely be affected by the un-transferrable factor...
  • T-HybridT-Hybrid Washed Up
    edited June 2009
    Except AC/DC was exportable.

    Though you bring up an excellent point. Everybody's crying about The Beatles not being exportable...but even being exportable didn't stop some of the same people from crying about AC/DC.
  • David2380David2380 Road Warrior
    edited June 2009
    T-Hybrid;2536719 said:
    Except AC/DC was exportable.

    Though you bring up an excellent point. Everybody's crying about The Beatles not being exportable...but even being exportable didn't stop some of the same people from crying about AC/DC.
    exactly...just the fact that it was a different disc affected the sales and it WAS exportable....It does make a major difference to people...
  • cherokeesamcherokeesam Washed Up
    edited June 2009
    T-Hybrid;2536692 said:

    Or they won't care...because they're "converts" and had no idea such an exportation option even existed.
    Why do people keep using this as an argument in favor of non-exportation? "If nobody even knows the option to export exists, then they must not want that option anyway." Huh? :confused:

    Sure, ignorance is bliss. But if people *really* don't know they have the option to mix their RB1 and RB2 setlists, by god, tell them. I guarandamtee you the vast majority will jump on that. There's absolutely no logical reason that any gamer would reject the ability to carry over content from one game to its sequel/spinoff.
  • ZidaneZidane Road Warrior
    edited June 2009
    I gotta agree with cherokeesam. The Beatles: Rock Band is pretty much just like GH: Metallica.

    Both use an updated engine. Metallica uses better vocals and a double bass pedal. Beatles use an updated engine harmonies and extra guitars.

    Both use a story arc, whether it's the true life opening for Metallica or the journey through the life of the Beatles.

    Both use exclusive DLC to the game, which cut offs a lot of fan support.

    Both have in game rendered characters of the band. (Though in the Beatles' defense they go through every era.

    They're just so similar.
Sign In or Register to comment.