What kind of song would be worth $3?

LuigiHannLuigiHann Stormtrooper
edited March 2010 in The Rock Band Network
There was some discussion of making a poll in this thread, so I figured I'd be proactive, and see if we can narrow down what makes a song worth $3. No offense to Blondie, but a lot of people seem to feel that particular song doesn't have what it takes to be worth the price... so what would? Some possible examples:

A) A very long song. For RBN, let's say 8-10 minutes is a long song.
B) An extremely popular song. Something everybody knows and likes
C) A particularly "epic" song. Maybe a multipart song with a long buildup to a fantastic rock-out climax
D) Any especially fun chart. Either through difficulty, creative charting, or enjoyable use of visual elements, or just plain above-average fun
E) A hard-to-get band. Somebody that you expected would never show up in this game due to their elite status
F) Your personal favorite song

Those are all the possible reasons I can think of. Any others? Any arguments for or against these? Which is the deciding factor?

Comments

  • JerkinatorJerkinator Road Warrior
    edited March 2010
    The only songs I can think of that I'd pay $3 for:

    - Iron Butterfly - In-a-Gadda-Da-Vida
    - Rush - 2112
    - Led Zeppelin - Stairway / Dazed / Kasmir

    They would have to be long, and they'd have to be classics. These are great songs, not really my favorites, but they would be worth the $. Not going to spend $3 on my favorite three-minute songs...
  • fcmleftyfcmlefty Road Warrior
    edited March 2010
    F and only F. Everything other than A is subjective, and A is a poor measurement because a songs length has no bearing on how good a song might be.
  • afterstasisafterstasis Washed Up
    edited March 2010
    all of those things could have bearing (as well as other factors), but there's no hard rule for me.

    i doubt i'll ever get a $3 song without careful consideration unless it's one of my absolute most wanted songs.
  • kingtonyxkingtonyx Unofficial
    edited March 2010
    Actually the more and more I think about it, the less and less I'm convinced I would spend $3 on ANY song. To me, once you spend $3 on a song you're opening (ever so slightly) the floodgates on EVERY song going up to $3.

    In fact I might say a band that was offered at that price would lose a bit of "favorite" status with me.
  • King_NuthinKing_Nuthin Road Warrior
    edited March 2010
    There are two types of songs I'd pay $3 for.

    1) The type of song so universally loved that every guest in my house would bash me for not owning it. That 90% of XBox Live players will own at any price. Something like "Sweet Child of Mine" that is universally popular across sexes (note this is not even close to my personal GnR song and I would expect it on the actual game disc because it is so huge).

    2) An essential genre title far enough out of the mainstream that it wouldn't attract a lot of buyers even at a low price point but is essential for genre fans. Like "Somebody's Gonna Get Their Head Kicked in Tonight" by the Rezillos (which is actually a cover so ineligible for RBN).

    Basically it has to be something that will get played a ton, one way or the other. Which is why I will personally rule out a 10 minute magnum opus because odds are I'd only play it a few times and rarely at parties.
  • bjyaritzbjyaritz Road Warrior
    edited March 2010
    kingtonyx;3555767 said:
    Actually the more and more I think about it, the less and less I'm convinced I would spend $3 on ANY song. To me, once you spend $3 on a song you're opening (ever so slightly) the floodgates on EVERY song going up to $3.

    In fact I might say a band that was offered at that price would lose a bit of "favorite" status with me.
    Dido.
  • SomethingWithPeachesSomethingWithPeaches Opening Act
    edited March 2010
    Any song off of Opeth's "Ghost Reveries" or "Devlierance" album.

    Minus the short accoustic songs.
  • afterstasisafterstasis Washed Up
    edited March 2010
    bjyaritz;3555772 said:
    Dido.
    i can see how one could draw parallels to perceived overpricing of songs to working with eminem, but i think you're being a bit extreme in that example.
  • wrldindstries302wrldindstries302 Road Warrior
    edited March 2010
    kingtonyx;3555767 said:
    Actually the more and more I think about it, the less and less I'm convinced I would spend $3 on ANY song. To me, once you spend $3 on a song you're opening (ever so slightly) the floodgates on EVERY song going up to $3.

    In fact I might say a band that was offered at that price would lose a bit of "favorite" status with me.
    I'm leaning towards this as well. I just don't feel comfortable telling EMI (in this case) that I'm willing to spend $3 on a song. Like I said in the other thread, "Bohemian Like You" is $3, and even though it's an amazing song that I was looking forward to, I just can't justify buying it.

    The only reason I said A only is because charting a 9-10 minute song is "extra work" for the charter, and the cost-per-minute of the song is about the same as a normal length $2 song.
  • T-HybridT-Hybrid Washed Up
    edited March 2010
    I think there's a missing poll option..."G) I don't know."

    Because honestly, it would all depend on the song. Certain songs may have REALLY fun charts that I want. Another may be less fun charts but be a very special song to me. It really for me isn't a set of hard standards that I would abide by for each tune.

    Though I can tell you for certain there is no one artist that I would spend $3 just because of who they are...and I know for a fact that song length means nothing to me.
  • bjyaritzbjyaritz Road Warrior
    edited March 2010
    afterstasis;3555783 said:
    i can see how one could draw parallels to perceived overpricing of songs to working with eminem, but i think you're being a bit extreme in that example.
    Diddo, not the singer.
  • afterstasisafterstasis Washed Up
    edited March 2010
    bjyaritz;3555792 said:
    Diddo, not the singer.
    never heard of them, but i'm not an eminem fan so i'll just take your word for it.
  • T-HybridT-Hybrid Washed Up
    edited March 2010
    kingtonyx;3555767 said:
    To me, once you spend $3 on a song you're opening (ever so slightly) the floodgates on EVERY song going up to $3.
    This type of doom and gloom scenario is completely unfounded. And since people would only spend $3 on certain types of songs...one would assume that they wouldn't spend it on EVERY song.

    And that is why you will never see EVERY song sold for $3. Because people will make exceptions for certain songs, but if every song starts being that price they'll quickly stop making exceptions and stop buying period.
  • AlphadeusAlphadeus Unsigned
    edited March 2010
    The only factor I consider at the moment (since this has never really come up) is song length. I feel a song would need to be 10+ minutes to even be considered worth more than $2.

    I mean there are over a thousand songs on Rock Band and not a single one officially released is more than $2. It would have to be really long or epic to be worth it.
  • wrldindstries302wrldindstries302 Road Warrior
    edited March 2010
    T-Hybrid;3555796 said:
    This type of doom and gloom scenario is completely unfounded. And since people would only spend $3 on certain types of songs...one would assume that they wouldn't spend it on EVERY song.

    And that is why you will never see EVERY song sold for $3. Because people will make exceptions for certain songs, but if every song starts being that price they'll quickly stop making exceptions and stop buying period.
    Remember when Microsoft first allowed an XBLA game to cost $15? And there was a big uproar?

    Now most of them do.
  • Lord_MhoramLord_Mhoram Road Warrior
    edited March 2010
    I went with (and only with) Personal attachment (favorite song).

    A) Song length - I personally couldn't care less about song length. If it is a great 3 minutes song, or a great 9 minutes song, it's still great.

    The next ones are all pretty much the same thing - what do other people think of the song:
    B) Song popularity - This might be a reason the label/artists charges 3 bucks, but there are plenty of popular songs I can't stand, and plenty of songs that are not popular that I would buy for 3 bucks.
    C) "Epic" status & E) Elite band status - These two are pretty much the same thing, just different degrees. Who cares. I don't like U2 in general, I also don't really care for the Stones. These bands are considered by some Epic. I wouldn't spend 3 bucks on any song by them, and likely wouldn't spend to.

    D) Impressively fun charts/gameplay I never bother with the charts. I don't care. I like to play music I like (and I like a lot of different kinds). A song I don't care for, no matter how well charted will be something I would never play, and never pay money for (even a buck, much less 3)

    For me it is all about the music - the gameplay and charts and whatnot are just another way for me to interact with music I like. So whether a song or band is popular or epic has no bearing on me, and neither do the charts. It's all about if I like (or listening to a sample think I would like*) a song.

    I'd spend 3 bucks on Queen songs (no surprise given my avatar). I'd go for 3 bucks for Ayreon, Rocket Scientists, Lana Lane, Roger Clyne and the peacemakers... and on.

    What the three dollar price tag does for me is move that purchase from a "sounds good I'll check it out" to a "I have to already like this song to buy it"

    * there are plenty of normal RB DLC that are songs and bands I've never heard of - I take a look on youtube, myspace ect to hear the song and think "That's pretty cool sounding, I'll download it". It's turned me onto a lot of bands I don't know, or led to like bands whose name I knew, but never really heard any of their music.

    Edit - I saw someone early commenting about the people in their band - I play 99% of my rock Band solo. Don't have friends that like the game (aside from one about 45 minutes away so we only play together every few months), and I never play online. So the only considerations for the songs are my personal tastes.
  • vedisvedis Road Warrior
    edited March 2010
    im with T Hybrid in that its gonna be more on a song to song basis, there may be some songs people have in their minds already as a go ahead(for me the top of the list is Twilight Zone by Golden Earring). but im sure thered be other things to consider

    my 2 biggest things

    1) how much i love the song, as stated above, Twilight Zone
    2) how much play would the song get by myself, my kid and her friends, and my friends at parties, to this extent, i hate to admit, but id pay 3 dollars for many Disney artists due to the ammount of play they would get.(note that i wouldnt pay that for any song, but for some, yes)
  • LuigiHannLuigiHann Stormtrooper
    edited March 2010
    kingtonyx;3555767 said:
    In fact I might say a band that was offered at that price would lose a bit of "favorite" status with me.
    I wouldn't hold the band accountable for something that is almost certainly the choice of the record label.
    bjyaritz;3555792 said:
    Diddo, not the singer.
    Ditto.
    T-Hybrid;3555790 said:
    I think there's a missing poll option..."G) I don't know."
    I knew I would miss something. Still, I made it so you can check multiple things, so you could vote for the options that you think could make a song worth extra, even if it wouldn't be guaranteed in every case. Voting for "fun charts" doesn't mean that every song with a fun chart should be $3, just that it would be a factor in deciding whether a specific $3 song is worthwhile
  • EhfahqEhfahq Headliner
    edited March 2010
    wrldindstries302;3555804 said:
    Remember when Microsoft first allowed an XBLA game to cost $15? And there was a big uproar?

    Now most of them do.
    Thats why I just got an email last week about the game coming out this month and the a lot of them are 800points.......like Perfect Dark.

    There are plenty of 800 points games. And if a company feels thier game warrents a 1200 point price, its up to them. The free market will decide if that was wise or not.
  • T-HybridT-Hybrid Washed Up
    edited March 2010
    wrldindstries302;3555804 said:
    Remember when Microsoft first allowed an XBLA game to cost $15? And there was a big uproar?
    You realize that since the price has increased, the types of games have also increased in quality right? Stuff like Marvel vs. Capcom, Castle Crashers, Penny Arcade Adventures.....

    Heck, up until Symphony of the Night XBLA games couldn't exceed a certain file size. Now we've got Portal: Still Alive which is like 1GB isn't it?
  • LuigiHannLuigiHann Stormtrooper
    edited March 2010
    Lord_Mhoram;3555806 said:
    C) "Epic" status & E) Elite band status - These two are pretty much the same thing, just different degrees.
    The difference I meant to convey is that C is about a specific song, and E is about a band. So there are some songs that I think are really epic, where the band has already released other songs as normal-priced DLC... So like Bohemian Rhapsody is an epic song (in my opinion), but Queen has already established themselves as a band that is willing to have their "normal" songs cost $2.

    "Stairway to Heaven" might be a candidate for both C and E, but one of Led Zeppelin's "normal, non-epic" songs might still sell for $3 by the band's status alone, and would thus qualify as E.

    Just using examples to illustrate the categories, hopefully somebody's disagreement with my assessment of those particular songs won't throw people off of my point...

    [Edit:] Speaking of straying from the point, I see where you guys are coming from with the XBLA comparison but I sort of think that tangent of discussion would fit better in the other thread. There is a parallel in that some XBLA games are subjectively worth more than others, but I don't think that the specific qualities which make a game more worthwhile are going to be directly analogous to the qualities that make a DLC song more worthwhile, so .... I lost my train of thought, but I'd say arguments for or against the "slippery slope" theory belong back in "We Refuse to Buy".
  • MikachuMikachu Road Warrior
    edited March 2010
    It would take a lot for me to buy a $3 song. It would have to be A, C, D, and F, all in one.
  • T-HybridT-Hybrid Washed Up
    edited March 2010
    Alphadeus;3555802 said:
    I mean there are over a thousand songs on Rock Band and not a single one officially released is more than $2. It would have to be really long or epic to be worth it.
    You realize that when you go to the movie you pay the same ticket price for 9 (clocking in just over an hour) that you would for Shutter Island (which is over two) right?

    You realize that if a baseball game goes 9 innings or 23 you still pay the same for the ticket right?

    You realize that if you buy a $60 video game, you could get hundreds of hours of gameplay (RPG) from the single player or only 6-8 (Bioshock) right?

    That's why the only thing that makes NO sense is length. There are lots of short fun songs and plenty of long boring ones.
  • vedisvedis Road Warrior
    edited March 2010
    T-Hybrid;3555843 said:
    You realize that when you go to the movie you pay the same ticket price for 9 (clocking in just over an hour) that you would for Shutter Island (which is over two) right?

    You realize that if a baseball game goes 9 innings or 23 you still pay the same for the ticket right?

    You realize that if you buy a $60 video game, you could get hundreds of hours of gameplay (RPG) from the single player or only 6-8 (Bioshock) right?

    That's why the only thing that makes NO sense is length. There are lots of short fun songs and plenty of long boring ones.
    you just broke their logic
  • afterstasisafterstasis Washed Up
    edited March 2010
    T-Hybrid;3555843 said:
    You realize that when you go to the movie you pay the same ticket price for 9 (clocking in just over an hour) that you would for Shutter Island (which is over two) right?

    You realize that if a baseball game goes 9 innings or 23 you still pay the same for the ticket right?

    You realize that if you buy a $60 video game, you could get hundreds of hours of gameplay (RPG) from the single player or only 6-8 (Bioshock) right?

    That's why the only thing that makes NO sense is length. There are lots of short fun songs and plenty of long boring ones.
    by the same token when i buy a 2 song standard-length album i'll probably pay the same as if i buy a 99 song standard-length album.
  • wrldindstries302wrldindstries302 Road Warrior
    edited March 2010
    T-Hybrid;3555843 said:
    You realize that when you go to the movie you pay the same ticket price for 9 (clocking in just over an hour) that you would for Shutter Island (which is over two) right?

    You realize that if a baseball game goes 9 innings or 23 you still pay the same for the ticket right?

    You realize that if you buy a $60 video game, you could get hundreds of hours of gameplay (RPG) from the single player or only 6-8 (Bioshock) right?

    That's why the only thing that makes NO sense is length. There are lots of short fun songs and plenty of long boring ones.
    I'm pretty likely to not see a movie in theaters if it's less than 90 or so minutes.

    Same with games. If a game doesn't have 15+ hours of gameplay, I'm going to wait for a price drop

    And I feel ripped off when I buy an "album" that ends up being less than 30 minutes.
  • UltraceUltrace Road Warrior
    edited March 2010
    k-mac;3555714 said:
    I agree with A, B, C, and E. Something like Stairway to Heaven, Layla, Comfortably Numb, Bohemian Rhapsody and songs 8-10 minutes long.
    Comfortably Numb is at the top of my list of songs that I would pay $3 for (along with, at the moment, Stairway to Heaven and a version of Freebird at least as long as in GH2), and I think it really encapsulates for me that the $3 song is going to be a combination of things. Comfortably Numb only runs about 6 minutes long, and, for the most part, certainly doesn't feature the most exciting charting (outside of the two guitar solos); Pink Floyd is certainly hard to acquire for rhythm games, but it's really more about a song having a certain "something" that you can't quite put your finger on.

    That having been said, the duration of the song is certainly a factor; I can't think of a scenario where I'd be willing to pay $3 for a 2-minute song, for instance.
  • aperfectorestesaperfectorestes Opening Act
    edited March 2010
    I would pay $3 for:

    Incubus - Sick Sad Little World
    Muse - New Born
  • Lord_MhoramLord_Mhoram Road Warrior
    edited March 2010
    LuigiHann;3555832 said:
    The difference I meant to convey is that C is about a specific song, and E is about a band. So there are some songs that I think are really epic, where the band has already released other songs as normal-priced DLC... So like Bohemian Rhapsody is an epic song (in my opinion), but Queen has already established themselves as a band that is willing to have their "normal" songs cost $2.


    I see your point. :)

    I was just commenting that "epic-ness" whether band or song, for the purposes of my disagreement with using that as a choice for why I would purchase a song, rather than type out the reason twice. :)
  • HelloMasterHelloMaster Opening Act
    edited March 2010
    T-Hybrid;3555843 said:
    You realize that if you buy a $60 video game, you could get hundreds of hours of gameplay (RPG) from the single player or only 6-8 (Bioshock) right?
    So would you be happy paying $60 dollars for Braid or Shadow Complex or Portal or the Half-Life episodes? After all, the only thing that really differentiates them from their genre cousins is length.

    If they'd ignored that and come out at full price, I don't think they would have sold as well.

    I've said before, length SHOULD NOT be the only factor. For me, it must come down to the quality of the charts, the "fun factor" if you like. But considering the amount of gameplay you'll get out of your purchase as one of many factors makes plenty of sense. Cost vs. Time is always a factor.
Sign In or Register to comment.