The Beatles: ROCK BAND - Rumors and Facts

Comments

  • iamtheddrmaniamtheddrman Merch-Table
    edited February 2009
    Doesany1rememberlaughter;1946129 said:
    I have a question. The press release states albums all the way up to Abbey Road, but what about Let it Be? Let it Be (album) was released after Abbey Road but it was finished before Abbey Road. Will we see Let it Be?
    It's all speculation right now. We can only hope it's in there. I see no reason why it would be excluded though
  • edited February 2009
    iamtheddrman;1946136 said:
    It's all speculation right now. We can only hope it's in there. I see no reason why it would be excluded though
    The only reason I could see was that they did not have the masters or the rights to the masters for that particular album. It seems odd that they would have the entire catalogue except for their last album though.
  • iamtheddrmaniamtheddrman Merch-Table
    edited February 2009
    Doesany1rememberlaughter;1946146 said:
    The only reason I could see was that they did not have the masters or the rights to the masters for that particular album. It seems odd that they would have the entire catalogue except for their last album though.
    Yeah. It's possible, but would be VERY strange to only exclude that one album. I'd be pretty disappointed to not get Let It Be, but it wouldn't stop me from getting the game
  • edited February 2009
    iamtheddrman;1946158 said:
    Yeah. It's possible, but would be VERY strange to only exclude that one album. I'd be pretty disappointed to not get Let It Be, but it wouldn't stop me from getting the game
    well of course not! But I would be bummed to get the entire discography except some of my favorites like Let it Be, Across the Universe, and The Long and Winding Road.
  • iamtheddrmaniamtheddrman Merch-Table
    edited February 2009
    Doesany1rememberlaughter;1946172 said:
    well of course not! But I would be bummed to get the entire discography except some of my favorites like Let it Be, Across the Universe, and The Long and Winding Road.
    My thoughts exactly
  • cherokeesamcherokeesam Washed Up
    edited February 2009
    The only reason I could see Let It Be not being part of the setlist would be if there's some kind of legal dispute between Apple Records and Phil Spector. McCartney HATED Spector's pawprints all over that album, to the point that he released Let It Be....Naked a few years ago to show what he *really* intended the album to sound like if Spector had not been around.
  • whofanwhofan Headliner
    edited February 2009
    /facepalm to this entire page.

    As has been stated MANY times in this thread already (at least 2 or 3 times by myself) "Let It Be" was recorded BEFORE "Abbey Road".
  • VenturaVentura Road Warrior
    edited February 2009
    whofan;1945471 said:
    They chased after and made sacrifices to ensure that one of the most requested bands on these forums signed onto their project.
    I'm pretty sure the Beatles not being playable with the entire collection we have at present wasn't a condition of that request. As usual it's a sacrifice we make, not them.

    I'll give them credit for re-licensing the entire collection of Rock Band 1 songs to be used in Rock Band 2. That was a good thing. Unfortunately the patch that added that functionality was only really the second patch to Rock Band 1, following the first which only really added the DLC store.

    I suspect that same level of 'service' will also be applied to Rock Band 2. Hold me back.
  • DMBilliesDMBillies Road Warrior
    edited February 2009
    Ventura;1947344 said:
    I'm pretty sure the Beatles not being playable with the entire collection we have at present wasn't a condition of that request. As usual it's a sacrifice we make, not them.
    Yup... non-exportable = non-purchase. Maybe a rental, but definitely won't have the replay necessary to justify plunking down $60. The Beatles are great, but I've heard their music a LOT already and I won't feel I'm missing that much...

    I'll give them credit for re-licensing the entire collection of Rock Band 1 songs to be used in Rock Band 2. That was a good thing. Unfortunately the patch that added that functionality was only really the second patch to Rock Band 1, following the first which only really added the DLC store.
    Re-licensing the tunes is key and getting the song catalogue beefed up is the one thing that RB can claim as the clear victory over GH with no questions asked. It makes me shudder to think that they would even think about releasing a RB-style game without exportable DLC... especially in light of not having a RB3 release in lieu of The Beatles game.

    I always laugh when people say, "they patched in the store" as if that were a selfless act that was a huge favor to RBers and that added a mode or addressed an unnecessary game play element that the community requested. You seem to have the same attitude as me... Thanks for patching in something that makes it easier for you to take my money. Honestly, thanks, I like it... but there's not a single HMX employee that could look at me with a straight face and tell me it was "just for the fans" or that it was the number 1 game play patch request.
    I suspect that same level of 'service' will also be applied to Rock Band 2.
    Why patch something for free when you can fix it for the next game and sell it to someone? At least you won't be disappointed...

    As a general rule, companies do not patch in new game modes or game improvements for free. It allows them to flaunt new features in the next iteration that really just address the shortcomings of previous versions.


    This post may sound slightly scathing but it isn't meant to be. I think HMX does a good job and RB2 is a good product, but it isn't perfect. I have not had enough drinks of HMX cool-aid to not have a realistic outlook on the situation.
  • JPSChampagneJPSChampagne Rising Star
    edited February 2009
    I'm a bit shocked by how much people are assuming they know about this project when virtually nothing has been said about it. HMX has all but denied a keyboard in the game and nowhere has it ever been officially stated that the songs won't carry over. Heck, they never even clearly stated "Not part of Rock Band". The closest I've heard to that effect is "Not JUST a Rock Band expansion". There's a difference between that and "Not a Rock Band expansion".

    Unless I've missed something somewhere (and if I've missed something big, please post it), I think you guys are making a mountain out of some erroneous reports and a couple possibly out-of-context quotes.

    Just my two cents.
  • jrinckjrinck Road Warrior
    edited February 2009
    Regarding the keyboard peripheral, if I was designing it, it would have 8 keys to represent one octave....

    C-D-E-F-G-A-B-C

    The note pattern would fly down in eight thin columns, each column representing one of the notes. No need to color code the keys, and no need to worry about changing octaves, as nobody cares about that with the guitar.

    Eight thin columns, one for each note in an octave. Do-re-mi!
  • whofanwhofan Headliner
    edited February 2009
    Ventura;1947344 said:
    I'm pretty sure the Beatles not being playable with the entire collection we have at present wasn't a condition of that request. As usual it's a sacrifice we make, not them.

    I'll give them credit for re-licensing the entire collection of Rock Band 1 songs to be used in Rock Band 2. That was a good thing. Unfortunately the patch that added that functionality was only really the second patch to Rock Band 1, following the first which only really added the DLC store.

    I suspect that same level of 'service' will also be applied to Rock Band 2. Hold me back.
    /facepalm again.

    I was talking about AC/DC
  • whofanwhofan Headliner
    edited February 2009
    DMBillies;1947599 said:
    Yup... non-exportable = non-purchase. Maybe a rental, but definitely won't have the replay necessary to justify plunking down $60. The Beatles are great, but I've heard their music a LOT already and I won't feel I'm missing that much...



    Re-licensing the tunes is key and getting the song catalogue beefed up is the one thing that RB can claim as the clear victory over GH with no questions asked. It makes me shudder to think that they would even think about releasing a RB-style game without exportable DLC... especially in light of not having a RB3 release in lieu of The Beatles game.

    I always laugh when people say, "they patched in the store" as if that were a selfless act that was a huge favor to RBers and that added a mode or addressed an unnecessary game play element that the community requested. You seem to have the same attitude as me... Thanks for patching in something that makes it easier for you to take my money. Honestly, thanks, I like it... but there's not a single HMX employee that could look at me with a straight face and tell me it was "just for the fans" or that it was the number 1 game play patch request.



    Why patch something for free when you can fix it for the next game and sell it to someone? At least you won't be disappointed...

    As a general rule, companies do not patch in new game modes or game improvements for free. It allows them to flaunt new features in the next iteration that really just address the shortcomings of previous versions.


    This post may sound slightly scathing but it isn't meant to be. I think HMX does a good job and RB2 is a good product, but it isn't perfect. I have not had enough drinks of HMX cool-aid to not have a realistic outlook on the situation.
    You do realize that programmers need to be PAID for their work, don't you?

    Here's a tip for you, and listen closely, programmers don't work for free. And how do you make money?

    All together now: NOT ON FREE PATCHES!
  • cmenearcmenear Rising Star
    edited February 2009
    DMBillies;1947599 said:
    Yup... non-exportable = non-purchase. Maybe a rental, but definitely won't have the replay necessary to justify plunking down $60. The Beatles are great, but I've heard their music a LOT already and I won't feel I'm missing that much...



    Re-licensing the tunes is key and getting the song catalogue beefed up is the one thing that RB can claim as the clear victory over GH with no questions asked. It makes me shudder to think that they would even think about releasing a RB-style game without exportable DLC... especially in light of not having a RB3 release in lieu of The Beatles game.

    I always laugh when people say, "they patched in the store" as if that were a selfless act that was a huge favor to RBers and that added a mode or addressed an unnecessary game play element that the community requested. You seem to have the same attitude as me... Thanks for patching in something that makes it easier for you to take my money. Honestly, thanks, I like it... but there's not a single HMX employee that could look at me with a straight face and tell me it was "just for the fans" or that it was the number 1 game play patch request.



    Why patch something for free when you can fix it for the next game and sell it to someone? At least you won't be disappointed...

    As a general rule, companies do not patch in new game modes or game improvements for free. It allows them to flaunt new features in the next iteration that really just address the shortcomings of previous versions.


    This post may sound slightly scathing but it isn't meant to be. I think HMX does a good job and RB2 is a good product, but it isn't perfect. I have not had enough drinks of HMX cool-aid to not have a realistic outlook on the situation.
    I actually hope what you say is the way they approach it. No export of the Beattles tracks because of all of the new features that it will represent. If you want to play the Beattles songs in a RB atmosphere, then you just have to wait for RB3, which will take any of the new features introduced in the Beattles edition and add to it to make a greater version of RB.

    Forward looking, rather than back...anticipated greatness rather than a retread of the game (like the AC/DC edition).
  • justindjustind Unsigned
    edited February 2009
    Come on Rocky Raccoon, that's all I ask.
  • nickha0nickha0 Unsigned
    edited February 2009
    God, I don't want a Beatles game if it means no Rock Band 3.
    Beatles are a good band, just not good for rock band.
    Oh excuse me. I meant "Visual Exploration Bullcrap."
  • jrinckjrinck Road Warrior
    edited February 2009
    justind;1947684 said:
    Come on Rocky Raccoon, that's all I ask.
    I love this song, but playing bass on it would drive me completely insane, if I didn't fall asleep first.
  • DethBoxxDethBoxx Road Warrior
    edited February 2009
    jrinck;1947626 said:
    Regarding the keyboard peripheral, if I was designing it, it would have 8 keys to represent one octave....

    C-D-E-F-G-A-B-C

    The note pattern would fly down in eight thin columns, each column representing one of the notes. No need to color code the keys, and no need to worry about changing octaves, as nobody cares about that with the guitar.

    Eight thin columns, one for each note in an octave. Do-re-mi!
    You would need 11 notes, or 12 since in your example you have the octave included. You forgot the black keys. Otherwise you might as well have some arbitrary number (like say 5) because real scales couldn't map to it anyway.
  • jrinckjrinck Road Warrior
    edited February 2009
    DethBoxx;1947885 said:
    You would need 11 notes, or 12 since in your example you have the octave included. You forgot the black keys. Otherwise you might as well have some arbitrary number (like say 5) because real scales couldn't map to it anyway.
    My musical opinion (which isn't worth much) is that the 8 basic notes would be good enough, for basic realism to screen real estate.

    BUT, thinking like an engineer, a case could be made for five keys so that someone without a keyboard peripheral could play keyboard with the guitar solo buttons.
  • instantdeath999instantdeath999 Washed Up
    edited February 2009
    I'm hoping this game will sell well, considering The Beatles 1 was released 30 years after their break up, and became the highest selling album of the year, beating out extremely popular records like Hybrid Theory.
  • mimicmimic Fairly Great Poster
    edited February 2009
    I heard a rumor that most people that play this game like bands like blink 182 and metallica.

    I heard that most people who like the beatles are like my dad, who is old and thinks video games are dumb.

    I heard that gh metallica will sell well, but the beatles will not.

    I also heard there will be no rock band 3 this year because of this dumb game.

    Sorry I have no links to back me up. Except the first one according to dlc sales.
  • SkodeSkode Headliner
    edited February 2009
    mimic;1948057 said:
    I heard a rumor that most people that play this game like bands like blink 182 and metallica.

    I heard that most people who like the beatles are like my dad, who is old and thinks video games are dumb.

    I heard that gh metallica will sell well, but the beatles will not.

    I also heard there will be no rock band 3 this year because of this dumb game.

    Sorry I have no links to back me up. Except the first one according to dlc sales.
    Haha - i cant argue with any of those points ;)
  • Rockbandfan23467Rockbandfan23467 Headliner
    edited February 2009
    Mimic is an *******.
  • mimicmimic Fairly Great Poster
    edited February 2009
    Rockbandfan23467;1948565 said:
    Mimic is an *******.
    Is that fact or opinion?
  • instantdeath999instantdeath999 Washed Up
    edited February 2009
    mimic;1948057 said:
    I heard a rumor that most people that play this game like bands like blink 182 and metallica.
    You're right. It's a well proven fact that it's impossible to like Metallica and the Beatles... simply too wide.
    mimic;1948057 said:


    I heard that most people who like the beatles are like my dad, who is old and thinks video games are dumb.

    Beatles records sell very well each and every year. Unless old people are re-buying the same records, I'd say this is wrong.
    mimic;1948057 said:


    I also heard there will be no rock band 3 this year because of this dumb game.

    There's always Guitar Hero...
  • cherokeesamcherokeesam Washed Up
    edited February 2009
    mimic;1948057 said:
    I heard a rumor that most people that play this game like bands like blink 182 and metallica.

    I heard that most people who like the beatles are like my dad, who is old and thinks video games are dumb.
    From Noble's XBL DLC tracking thread:

    Top 25 downloaded tracks(or packs/albums) of all time over xbox Live as of 02/09/09
    1 - Still Alive
    2 - Promised Land
    3 - Charlene (I'm right Behind you)
    4 - All the Small Things
    5 - Move Along
    6 - Dirty Little Secret
    7 - Headphones on
    8 - Buddy Holly
    9 - Metallica pack 01
    10 - The Kill
    11 - Jukebox hero
    12 - Fortunate son
    13 - Interstate Love Song
    14 - B.Y.O.B
    15 - Crushcrushcrush
    16 - My Sharona
    17- Toxicity - up 1 spot
    18 - Snow((Hey Oh)) - down 1 spot
    19 - Wonderwall
    20 - Gimme three steps
    21 - More Than a feeling
    22 - Afterlife
    23 - Attack
    24 - This ain't a scene it's an arms race
    25 - Roxanne


    Wow! Those same RB players who buy Metallica and Blink-182 (and AAR, Weezer, SOAD, A7X, Paramore and 30 Seconds to Mars) also buy Foreigner, CCR, The Knack, Lynyrd Skynyrd, Boston and The Police....

    must be those old guys like your dad who think video games are dumb.
  • Ferocious QFerocious Q Headliner
    edited February 2009
    Sgt pepper ftw
  • jdragerjdrager Opening Act
    edited February 2009
    instantdeath999;1948714 said:
    You're right. It's a well proven fact that it's impossible to like Metallica and the Beatles... simply too wide.
    lawl, true dat

    must i recommend Beatallica?
  • DMBilliesDMBillies Road Warrior
    edited February 2009
    whofan;1947654 said:
    You do realize that programmers need to be PAID for their work, don't you?

    Here's a tip for you, and listen closely, programmers don't work for free. And how do you make money?

    All together now: NOT ON FREE PATCHES!
    I may have miswrote... or you may have misread... but I was pretty much saying this.

    I don't hold my breathe for HMX to patch in new game features that are non-essential because it is NOT free to make such a patch and as a company there is no direct payoff for a patch... especially when the company can save those non-essential patches and apply them to the next game release.
  • VenturaVentura Road Warrior
    edited February 2009
    DMBillies;1947599 said:
    As a general rule, companies do not patch in new game modes or game improvements for free. It allows them to flaunt new features in the next iteration that really just address the shortcomings of previous versions.
    I don't mind that, it's when they deliberately withhold arguably essential fixes in order to promote purchasing the sequel.

    Rock Band 1 on the ps3 lagged so much with a sizeable amount of DLC installed that it took what felt like forever just to scroll through it all. When you're ready to play and have had to wade past the half dozen loading screens just to get to that list, scrolling through your DLC that slowly got very old, very quickly.

    That's what I didn't like. You don't pass on fixing the bugs to entice customers to your sequel.
    whofan;1947645 said:
    /facepalm again.

    I was talking about AC/DC
    Feeling pretty smug for something you didn't make atall clear, especially in light of this thread being about discussion of the Beatles project.

    Ironically enough, my point about us generally having to be the ones making all the sacrifices still applies.

    Can't help but notice that's something of mine you didn't comment.

    /facepalm
    whofan;1947654 said:
    You do realize that programmers need to be PAID for their work, don't you?

    Here's a tip for you, and listen closely, programmers don't work for free. And how do you make money?

    All together now: NOT ON FREE PATCHES!
    Drama queen FTW.

    How does improving their own software not benefit them? It makes for happy customers; happy customers are generally loyal customers, and loyal customers come back for more. They tell all their friends how happy they are that you're not abandoning each version of your software just to cash in at their expense, and that boosts sales even further.

    Really, this isn't brain surgery mate.
Sign In or Register to comment.