What right does Activision have... [Archive] - Rock Band Forums // Rock Band®

Kaziganthi

12-29-2007, 07:17 PM

I'm just trying to understand what right Activision has to block a patch for someone elses game from being released. I have been waiting for the patch that Harmonix already developed and Sony is now preventing from being released because Activision doesn't want it released. If this were any other situation, the patch sould have already been released. Why has Sony agreed to prevent users of Rock Band from enjoying the game to its fullest extent when everything runs fine on their competing system?

It is interesting to me that I have not seen anyone bring up the point yet that Sony is preventing the patch from releasing because of Activisions complaints. It seems to me that if activision had any legal standing to prevent the patch, they would have filed a law suit to prevent Harmonix from releasing the patch. This joke has been going on for to long. It is time for Activision to either release their hold on the patch or Sony to realize that Activision has no right to prevent its release and stop delaying its release.

Magnet

12-29-2007, 07:28 PM

Sony is just caving to Activision's pressure. I'm sure Activision has figured out a nice way to keep Sony on its side. Any threats from the largest third-party publisher mean a lot to Sony right now.

It's really a shame though that Sony can't just allow the patch to be released. If I were MTV Games, I would kindly let Sony know that future games published by MTV Games will be 360 exclusives if they can't even release all their patches for their own games on the PS3. Maybe something like that would cause Sony to buckle to pressure from the side of MTV Games/HMX for once.

You have to wonder how Activision even knew about this patch before its initial release date. Does Sony take all submitted patches for PS3 games, show them to competing third-party companies, and ask permission before giving an okay? What is going on behind the scenes at Sony anyway? Ridiculous.

YouAreNotSpecial

12-29-2007, 07:39 PM

Um, Redoctane has the right to decide how their guitar peripherals are used? then again, Im only really saying this b/c I have a 360.

Bearclaw

12-29-2007, 07:52 PM

I think it is a better idea to, rather than post on a HMX board, to go out nad e-mail Activision. Voice your concern and hopefully they will see the error of their ways. After all, it is our choice whether or not Activision is able to sell anything, we are the consumers.

CMW16

12-29-2007, 07:59 PM

yea.. this is BS.. how can the 360 still use it, but no the ps3??? did actvision make the same threat to microsoft or what???

Aircon

12-29-2007, 08:03 PM

The patch was accidentally released onto the 360 and now cannot be reversed.

Bearclaw

12-29-2007, 08:08 PM

I do not believe that is the case, it was just made so due to HMX experience with RedOctane and GHII. They already knew how the controllers worked internally, so they could program it into Rock Band. They did not, however, have the same foresight with the PS3. That, I believe is the dilemma PS3 owners now face. Besides, I highly doubt Microsoft would crumble to threats as Sony currently must. They are attempting to save a dieing console, Sony cannot afford to lose the support of a major third party developer.

xxpigxx

12-29-2007, 08:11 PM

Welcome to SOE. Destroying games is their favorite hobby

King_Nuthin

12-29-2007, 08:35 PM

dfjdejulio

12-29-2007, 08:52 PM

I'm just trying to understand what right Activision has to block a patch for someone elses game from being released.

You'd have to ask Sony. Nobody else knows.

It's kinda absurd that Sony is letting Activision get away with this. It's pretty clearly hurting Sony. People are choosing the XBox 360 over the PS3 because of this issue.

dfjdejulio

12-29-2007, 08:56 PM

I do not believe that is the case, it was just made so due to HMX experience with RedOctane and GHII. They already knew how the controllers worked internally, so they could program it into Rock Band.

A common theory among PS3 users, but this isn't it.

Know how you can tell?

Rock Band is not the only other rhythm game on the XBox to support the GH guitars. "Boom Boom Rocket" also does.

It detects when a guitar is connected, changes how notes are displayed to work better with a guitar, allows you to use the starpower/overdrive move during the game, and lists your controller as "GTR" rather than "PAD" on the leaderboards.

No, the answer is, on the 360, no controller manufacturer is allowed to deny anyone the use of their controllers. Even hobbyist titles written using XNA are allowed to use the guitar controllers without any input from Activision/Red Octane, because MSFT says so.

xxpigxx

12-30-2007, 01:06 AM

IOW . . . Sony needs to grow some nads and tell Activision to put up or get out

Flyerfye

12-30-2007, 01:27 AM

One good thing about MS, they know how to take their standards, and make everything fit to them.

The thing is, Activision still has the rights to determine how their peripherals are used, and can, in fact, charge for whoever wants to use them. Xbox 360 standards prevent this from doing any good, as everything is made to very specific regulations as far as 3rd party controllers are concerned.

It's a dick move by Activision, but they do have business strategy behind it. The truth of the matter is, GHIII is still outselling Rock Band, partially because of their respective price points. Activision's bet is that most consumers (not hardcore gamers like the people who visit this here forum) still make up most of the market, and they may, in fact, be more likely to purchase GHIII over Rock Band, just because it costs less. And by blocking this, they can, to some small extent, reduce Rock Band's sales, just a little bit. The people who bought Guitar Hero 3 and "potentially" might want to get Rock Band actually outweigh the people who bought Rock Band and "potentially" might get Guitar Hero III, and the non-compatibility could effect their purchase choice. (Disclaimer: This is just a theory.) Unfortunately, this is just a bad deal to all of us on these here forums. Except those who got the 360 version. However, I decided not to get GHIII, just on principle.

toefer2

12-30-2007, 02:45 AM

While Activision is clearly the bad guy here, I do think Sony shares in the blame. They can and should be able to require an officially licensed piece of hardware to be usable in any game that wants to use it.

If Activision wants to threaten to withhold a future title Harmonix should see if they can get EA to threaten to withhold Madden. I bet the patch would go up tomorrow.

PS3 owners aren't huge fans of EA Sports products, so I'm not sure how well that would work.

I think the best thing to do is to release the patch online, and claim it was just some random hacker who developed it. Allow people to download it, claim on the website that its in no way affiliated with Harmonix or EA, and then bam, problem solved.

I used to have a DVD burning program that wouldn't burn copy protected DVDs, but they released a patch for it to crack the copy protection, and posted it on a website that claimed it had nothing to do with the program.

The only potential problem is I don't know if you can download a patch, and then have it install onto a PS3 through the USB jump-drive, or something like that.

Transbrak

12-30-2007, 03:31 AM

if i was sony i would release the patch, let activision sue. i bet activision would lose anyway.

Hanover

12-30-2007, 12:30 PM

Then how come when I plug in the strat to play GHIII on the 360 it comes up with a nice big colorful message telling me I cannot play GHIII with the strat because it's not an "Official" GHIII controller?

The way it works is that the controllers themselves have to be built to a standard XBOX 360 spec...but the software company can obviously place checks in the software to see what type of controller is plugged in. Obviously Harmonix chose not to block anyone's guitar controller on the 360 version and Activision did. There's nothing Activision could do about this as they cannot force Harmonix to lock out GHIII guitars.

The PS3 is based on open standards and unfortunately Activision is the first company to take advantage of this in a completely negative way.

My guess is that after the 3rd Party Peripherals make their way onto the market, Activision will change their mind...Its just right now without the compatibility, the PS3 versions of both Rock Band and GH III are on even ground. Once the stand-alone strats are available, Activision can then say, "Here's your compatibility...wouldn't you want one of our controllers instead?"

Hopefully thats when Harmonix tells Activision to screw themselves and lets every other peripheral use their software except for the Guitar Hero controllers. (but I know they're too nice to do that sort of thing)

No, the answer is, on the 360, no controller manufacturer is allowed to deny anyone the use of their controllers. Even hobbyist titles written using XNA are allowed to use the guitar controllers without any input from Activision/Red Octane, because MSFT says so.

Segnosaur

12-30-2007, 12:45 PM

I dont get it activision has a market here. They have people begging to be able to use and buy their guitars.They could make money here. They dont seem like very good capitalists.

batsu336

12-30-2007, 12:46 PM

Guys, it's basic copyright law. Activision/Red Octane own the patent rights to the GH guitars and internal workings of those guitars. Harmonix had to create their new guitars differently so as not to infringe on the GH copyright, which they are no longer a part of. That means a patch is needed for compatability. Compatability has to be agreed upon by both parties involved, or lawsuits can (and would) be filed. Activision has every right to say no, even though there appears to be no real reason for them to do so, since they would make a profit by selling guitars to RB owners. They just want Harmonix to pay them as well. I do not know why the 360 is compatible. If the compatibility was "accidentally" built in, then Harmonix could potentially have to pay a certain royalty % to Activision...if Activision decided to pursue it. However, if Activision signs a compatability agreement with Harmonix, then any pending lawsuit regarding the 360 copyright infringment might be dismissed on the grounds that the two parties reached an agreement. Neither side has mentioned why one platform is compatible wile the other is not, which probably means neither side wants to make a release that could be used against them in a later legal issue.

Er....in short: Activision is trying to put the squeeze on Harmonix for some extra cash, and has them by the short hairs.

Segnosaur

12-30-2007, 01:00 PM

doesnt anyone else find it odd that the les paul's didnt work out of the box on rock band's release. Didn't harmonix test that kind of stuff.

Hanover

12-30-2007, 01:06 PM

Because right now they bundle a game with their controller. This is where they have leverage to say, "Hey, you can still play SOMETHING with that guitar you bought...since you cant buy it without the game."

When they start selling the Les Paul's by themselves, then they will NEED those people using it for Rock Band because I really doubt many people would buy a second Les Paul simply to play two player in GHIII.

I dont get it activision has a market here. They have people begging to be able to use and buy their guitars.They could make money here. They dont seem like very good capitalists.

Segnosaur

12-30-2007, 01:10 PM

but a guitar alone would be less profit than a game guitar bundle. They would make more money by forcing rock band ps3 players to buy the guitar hero bundle.

dfjdejulio

12-30-2007, 01:10 PM

I think the best thing to do is to release the patch online, and claim it was just some random hacker who developed it. Allow people to download it, claim on the website that its in no way affiliated with Harmonix or EA, and then bam, problem solved.

This keeps coming up as a suggestion.

THEY CAN'T.

It would look to Sony's network like a hacked version of the game, it would not be identical to the version that Sony supports on their network. It would make the local game be different, and would screw up any future patches.

They can't do this. Stop suggesting it, people.

dfjdejulio

12-30-2007, 01:13 PM

Then how come when I plug in the strat to play GHIII on the 360 it comes up with a nice big colorful message telling me I cannot play GHIII with the strat because it's not an "Official" GHIII controller?

Because even though the guitar follows standards, it still identifies itself. The GH3 folks do not want a standard. So they ask the guitar "hey, I know you're a guitar, but are you our guitar?", and when it correctly identifies itself, GH3 shoves its fingers in its ears, clenches its eyes shut, and goes "la la la, I can't hear you".

If Activision/Neversoft wanted the Stratocaster to work, it would. But they want it not to work, and that's easy for a software developer to arrange.

Meanwhile, they cannot prevent anyone from using their guitars with other titles, which is why "Boom Boom Rocket" and XNA titles can utilize 'em (in addition to Rock Band).

Hanover

12-30-2007, 01:16 PM

Yeah, but you have to remember....DLC is also a factor in this. By keeping the guitars separate, it forces you to play BOTH GAMES rather than just using both guitars for one game. So buying DLC for one side doesn't automatically cancel out buying DLC for the other side. Thus Activision, in theory, sells DLC regardless of what comes out on Rock Band.

But it doesn't matter. Red Octane and Activision are screwed. They will NEVER match the download-able content available for Rock Band. They do not have one of the biggest influences in music behind them. The fact that Metallica is letting us have the first track of their new album before it's released says a lot. The fact we are getting Nevermind (I cannot wait to play Smells Like Teen Spirit)...says a lot.

As soon as the instruments are available independently, you will see Rock Band sales spike even higher...and think of what happens if a third party puts out a better drum controller or guitars? Wow, that means we have more CHOICES with the Rock Band brand while Guitar Hero locks us into what Activision wants us to buy.

At that point, Red Octane will NEED us to buy their controllers for Rock Band and I can bet you anything the Red Octane/Activision relationship will splinter and Red Octane will end up back with Harmonix once more. Just my prediction.

but a guitar alone would be less profit than a game guitar bundle. They would make more money by forcing rock band ps3 players to buy the guitar hero bundle.

DesiredFX

12-30-2007, 01:40 PM

Um, Redoctane has the right to decide how their guitar peripherals are used?

No, they don't. That was decided in the courts years ago.

I bought it, I can use it however I want. At this point, it's most useful as a way to serve snacks around the room without leaving my chair.

icantwaitforrockband

12-30-2007, 01:49 PM

PS3 owners aren't huge fans of EA Sports products, so I'm not sure how well that would work.

WOW! That is the most ridiculously generalized statement ever! I have a
PS3. I like sports games. What say you now?

No, they don't. That was decided in the courts years ago.

I bought it, I can use it however I want. At this point, it's most useful as a way to serve snacks around the room without leaving my chair.

HA! Awesome..!

Takhisis

12-30-2007, 01:51 PM

Because its the law and sony doesnt want a huge ass lawsuit its that simple

Edgehopper

12-30-2007, 02:18 PM

batsu336, you're not a lawyer, are you?

Guys, it's basic copyright law. Activision/Red Octane own the patent rights to the GH guitars and internal workings of those guitars.

Nope, the guitar controllers aren't patented or even patentable. If you actually look at the marked patents for GH3, none of them are for the guitar controller.

Harmonix had to create their new guitars differently so as not to infringe on the GH copyright, which they are no longer a part of. That means a patch is needed for compatability. Compatability has to be agreed upon by both parties involved, or lawsuits can (and would) be filed.

Based on what law? There's a copyright in the look of the guitar and the visual design of the guitar, but there's no copyright interest in a signal format that goes to the console (to the extent that there is, it's Sony or Microsoft's copyright depending on console.)

I do not know why the 360 is compatible. If the compatibility was "accidentally" built in, then Harmonix could potentially have to pay a certain royalty % to Activision...if Activision decided to pursue it. However, if Activision signs a compatability agreement with Harmonix, then any pending lawsuit regarding the 360 copyright infringment might be dismissed on the grounds that the two parties reached an agreement. Neither side has mentioned why one platform is compatible wile the other is not, which probably means neither side wants to make a release that could be used against them in a later legal issue.

Nope; there's no copyright infringement in any case in this entire situation. Because there's nothing being copied. Copyright doesn't govern compatibility.

Er....in short: Activision is trying to put the squeeze on Harmonix for some extra cash, and has them by the short hairs.

Yes, Activision is trying to put the squeeze on Harmonix; no it doesn't have them by the short hairs, at least on any IP theory. The only legal argument Activision might have is in the EULA governing how their guitar controllers are to be used, but such an EULA is probably unenforceable. What's more likely is that Activision, the giant behemoth dominating the video game industry, is using simple financial pressure to prevent Sony from releasing the patch. That seems to me to be an antitrust violation, but I don't know enough details to say that as an informed opinion.

As a general rule--unless you actually know something about IP law, don't pretend you do.

xNOSOUP4YOUx

12-30-2007, 02:21 PM

The patch was accidentally released onto the 360 and now cannot be reversed.

So... who votes we get Sony to *accidentally* release the patch just like Microsoft.

And let me guess, after that patch was accidentally released on Live for the 360, Activision didn't give a **** did they?

Takhisis

12-30-2007, 02:22 PM

Your a idiot its the law copywrite protected period , trust me every company trademarks there products, they have to , they sell license's to other companies to allow them to make simular products

Edgehopper

12-30-2007, 02:34 PM

Your a idiot its the law copywrite protected period , trust me every company trademarks there products, they have to , they sell license's to other companies to allow them to make simular products

1. Grammar and spelling; they're good for you. And better for your readers.

2. The law doesn't protect things just because the company says so. Some guy in Duluth can't pop into Harmonix's office tomorrow and say, "Hey, I thought of the term 'Overdrive' years ago to use in music games; give me money or I'll sue you."

Guide to IP law as it works with the GH/RB serieses:

Copyright: Generally protects expressions, but not ideas. In the music game world, copyright protects the music, the notecharts, the code, and the look of the controller. The protection copyright offers is that it prevents others from copying the expression or written work.

Patents: These protect ideas, but there are stricter requirements for getting protection; they have to be novel, non-obvious, and useful, and the patent has to be filed and accepted with the government to get protection. Harmonix has patents on technologies for lagless musical collaboration over a network, and for expressing notes on a non-2D music game track (as seen in Amplitude and Frequency)

Trademarks: These protect names of goods, services, and businesses, and are meant to prevent consumer confusion. You get trademark protection through use, and it doesn't have to be registered with the government (but you get some extra protection if you do register your trademark). Harmonix, Guitar Hero, Rock Band, Activision, and Red Octane are all trademarks. The protection you get is the power to prevent others from using the name or a confusingly similar one in trade.

Trade secrets: These protect a business's confidential information from espionage. You get protection by taking substantial steps to keep information secret; the most well known examples are the secret recipes for KFC Original Recipe and for Coca-Cola. Activision's code for guitar controller recognition might be protected as a trade secret. However, trade secrets aren't protected from reverse engineering; I can get in trouble for spying on Coca-Cola and stealing their recipe, but not for figuring out the formula through independent reverse engineering.

I don't see how any of the forms of IP protection would get HMX into trouble for releasing the patch, but there may be details I don't know. From what I do know, this issue isn't about IP law.

DesiredFX

12-31-2007, 03:43 PM

A common theory among PS3 users, but this isn't it.

Know how you can tell?

Rock Band is not the only other rhythm game on the XBox to support the GH guitars. "Boom Boom Rocket" also does.

Actually, I think the theory still holds: the concept behind the theory is that HMX made Rock Band 360 compatible with the Xplorer, which automatically made it compatible with the Les Paul 360 controller because Activision/Red Octane wanted the Xplorer to be compatible with GHIII 360.

So in order to achieve the same compatibility with the Les Paul 360, the developers of Boom Boom Rocket only needed to make it compatible with the Xplorer, the same way Harmonix did.

In summary, I believe the Les Paul 360 is compatible with both games because the developers had an existing template to work from for which Neversoft was told to ensure compatibility.

sporkBrigade

12-31-2007, 04:20 PM

I dont get it activision has a market here. They have people begging to be able to use and buy their guitars.They could make money here. They dont seem like very good capitalists.

No, they have people who already bought a Les Paul demanding that it work with Rock Band, because Rock Band is their second purchase. The key here is that those people have already made their Les Paul purchase. There's no market there for Activision.

The Market we're talking about are people who buy GH3, and then want to buy Rock Band. By keeping things the way they are, these people are less likely to buy Rock Band because of the hassle of rebuying all the controllers. In the future, a Market may develop of Rock Band buyers who want to buy Guitar Hero as their second purchase. But right now, this is rare and unimportant in the grand scheme.

sporkBrigade

12-31-2007, 04:32 PM

So... who votes we get Sony to *accidentally* release the patch just like Microsoft.

And let me guess, after that patch was accidentally released on Live for the 360, Activision didn't give a **** did they?

Whoever made that patch comment was misinformed, lying, or an idiot. Microsoft never released a patch for compatibility. The guitars on XBox have been compatible since day one. They had to be, Microsoft requires it. The only issue comes up software side, where GH3 is programmed to only work with "Red Octane" guitars.

miketoast

12-31-2007, 04:40 PM

dfjdejulio

12-31-2007, 04:47 PM

So... who votes we get Sony to *accidentally* release the patch just like Microsoft.

And let me guess, after that patch was accidentally released on Live for the 360, Activision didn't give a **** did they?

There was no accidental patch for the 360. You can install the Rock Band disc into an XBox that doesn't have a hard drive or a network connection, and the Les Paul will work just fine. It was shipped on the disc supporting the GH2 and GH3 guitars.

dfjdejulio

12-31-2007, 04:51 PM

Patents: These protect ideas, but there are stricter requirements for getting protection; they have to be novel, non-obvious, and useful, and the patent has to be filed and accepted with the government to get protection. Harmonix has patents on technologies for lagless musical collaboration over a network, and for expressing notes on a non-2D music game track (as seen in Amplitude and Frequency)

Decent summary, but you left out design patents, which are a different beast.

(Design patents cover the visual look of something, not its functionality. It's how fonts are often protected.)

Activision may well have a design patent on the Les Paul... but that wouldn't have any impact on anyone's ability to use it, just to market a similar-looking clone. Basing the RB guitar on the stratocaster instead of the les paul would be enough to get around a design patent if they even have one.

sporkBrigade

12-31-2007, 04:52 PM

All this sheet makes no sense to me...

The way I see it since no stand alone Rock Band instruments are available the market is huge for a second controller, enter Activision selling their "compatible" LP for all to buy. They clean up and everybody is happy. PS3 users now have a second guitar (and GH3) and Activision made tons of loot because they saw a chance to force their game on thousands of people in need of another guitar. Everybody wins...

Instead Activision chose to make Sony hold the patch thus depriving PS3 users and creating enormous ill will from both PS3 and Xbox owners (who now know that Activision will screw them next the first chance they get).

Once those stand alone Rock Band controllers come out that window and all the profit that could come with it is closed.

I, for one, will not buy any cr@p that Activision puts out in the future. Fukkkk them....

The Market for people who own Rock Band and don't own Guitar Hero 3 is insanely small. It's a small blip on the radar. I'm sure someone is going to reply to me claiming they are one of these people, but don't delude yourself. You're not just the minority, you're the VAST minority.

People bought Guitar Hero 3, and then are considering the Rock Band pruchase. It's not the other way around. Sure, a lot of you bought guitar hero 3 only because you thought the guitar would work. But that's life, it's already purchased. Compatible or not, Guitar Hero 3 is selling great. A restriction on compatibility hurts Rock Band, and does very little damage to Activision. It also hurts use the consumer, but that really doesn't matter for now. That's just how it is.

I'm not defending Activision, of course. I'm saying claims that Activision is losing money on this deal is just far from the truth. It's a disgusting business practice, but it's profitable. They won't stop doing it until it stops being profitible.

So here comes the moral of the story. Buy Rock Band, don't buy Guitar Hero 3. But if you're at this forum, most likely it's already too late. :\

dfjdejulio

12-31-2007, 04:52 PM

Actually, I think the theory still holds: the concept behind the theory is that HMX made Rock Band 360 compatible with the Xplorer, which automatically made it compatible with the Les Paul 360 controller because Activision/Red Octane wanted the Xplorer to be compatible with GHIII 360.

So in order to achieve the same compatibility with the Les Paul 360, the developers of Boom Boom Rocket only needed to make it compatible with the Xplorer, the same way Harmonix did.

But they couldn't do it "the same way Harmonix did", according to this theory, because they didn't have the special knowledge of the guitar that Harmonix did from having worked on it with GH2.

The thing is, any controller is accessed on the XBox through the same APIs. A hardware vendor cannot stop developers from using their controller. This is why even XNA titles can utilize guitar controllers.

sporkBrigade

12-31-2007, 05:04 PM

Decent summary, but you left out design patents, which are a different beast.

(Design patents cover the visual look of something, not its functionality. It's how fonts are often protected.)

Activision may well have a design patent on the Les Paul... but that wouldn't have any impact on anyone's ability to use it, just to market a similar-looking clone. Basing the RB guitar on the stratocaster instead of the les paul would be enough to get around a design patent if they even have one.

This is a very key point to anyone who thinks Activision has strong legal grounds for what they're doing. You need to seperate in your mind the act of copying or recreating their product, and the actual use of their product. There is very little law wise to protect companies when it comes to use outside the music industry. There are User agreements, but those don't hold up as well as you'd think they do. Either way, you certainly don't want to SUPPORT this practice.

Imagine not being able to use a harddrive with a certain video card, due to conflicting interests. Or if you want to get into the ridiculous, imagine only being able to buy certain hammers for certain nails. It's a mess, it's disgusting, and it certainly isn't very supported by any law.

Activision has a history of claiming damages to their IPs, true or not, and it's most likely the case here. But that doesn't mean it holds water. Sony just doesn't want to get involved. The only action Sony needs to take is stronger policies regarding the controllers produced for their console. Right now, they don't restrict anything. If it's usb or bluetooth, and it works, it's fine. That's where they're being irresponsible, and that needs to be the topic of any emails/complaints directed at them. Anything else is a waste of time.

DesiredFX

12-31-2007, 07:07 PM

Meh. I finally gave up and traded in my GH3 for less than diddley squat at the local GameStop. Now I can just give Harmonix my business and forget that Activision even exists.

The only thing nagging at me was that if the PS3 version had been compatible out of the box the way the 360 version was, Activision wouldn't even have flinched.

Xzyliac

12-31-2007, 10:00 PM

To the original poster:

Simply put it's their hardware. The end.

SirSurpent

12-31-2007, 10:17 PM

I love my X-Box 360...nuff' said...

toefer2

12-31-2007, 11:23 PM

This keeps coming up as a suggestion.

THEY CAN'T.

It would look to Sony's network like a hacked version of the game, it would not be identical to the version that Sony supports on their network. It would make the local game be different, and would screw up any future patches.

They can't do this. Stop suggesting it, people.

Whoa. Calm down. If you read my entire post you'd see I included:

The only potential problem is I don't know if you can download a patch, and then have it install onto a PS3 through the USB jump-drive, or something like that.

WOW! That is the most ridiculously generalized statement ever! I have a
PS3. I like sports games. What say you now?

Sure it was generalized (in reference to my PS3 owners/EA Sports line), but ridiculous? I don't think so. But to each his own.

I like sports games as much as the next guy, and they tend to make up a majority of my video game collection. But I don't know what games you've been playing if you think EA Sports is producing quality PS3 products.

Madden 08 was a step back from Madden 07, which in itself had issues. NASCAR 08 was just...wow. Live has been the crappier NBA game for a few years running, though this year it improved. Soccer arguably isn't a sport, but Fifa can't compete with Winning 11. Their baseball games had way too many homeruns, so luckily they can't make them anymore. Tiger Woods is good, I guess. But it has no competition. And there are probably others, but you get the point.

Granted, none of that has to do specifically with the PS3, but with the PS3 versions, you tend to get a crappier version (compared to the 360 one) of an already lackluster game. The problem is that so long as people like you, presumably, go out and buy all the new titles each year, EA has no incentive to make them any better.

Korne

01-25-2008, 01:14 PM

No, Activision knew the patch was coming anyway, since there was a huge demand for Rockband controllers for GH3. The fact that it would also fix other problems was just added incentive to block the patch. But why would activision do this, they hurt their own sales as well as the sales from Sony and Rockband. This just hurts everyone, and that is why I'm boycotting all Activision games. I've already thrown GH3 away.

kaiserkreb

01-25-2008, 01:39 PM

why doesn't hmx just add a controller mapping routine to the game so that you can plug in a gh3 controller and just map the controls to whatever works for rockband? That's nice and nondescript. Every computer has the ability through controller software and most have in game options as well, to map any button to anything you want. I don't think Activision can argue against that.

Kenfucious

01-25-2008, 01:57 PM

Um, Redoctane has the right to decide how their guitar peripherals are used? then again, Im only really saying this b/c I have a 360.

No offense implied buddy, but that attitude has been one of the underlying causes of this silly corporate bullying tactics in intellectual property.

>rant mode engage<

... paying a "licensing fee" to be "allowed" to play a game developed by a company, on their proprietary equipment. BS, imho, but that is how the law works right now.

There is a contractual agreement between producer and consumer, implied by the giving of consumer cash for producer products. ...

now.. what kind of mullarky is that anyway? I mean, really, let's think about the underlying falacy of law that allows this kind of thinking..

is it right? not just no but hell no. We pay for something, common sense tells us we should be able to use it however we please, not because that product is 'leased' to us, but because .. and let me underline this to emphasize the importance of the argument: we payed money for a product.

meh, it goes against every instinct I have as a capitalist to allow this brand of thinking to continue.. we pay for goods or services, and we receive them. That is the extent of the contract.

Now, the reason for the laws, the protection of intellectual ideas in that capitalistic system, I whole-heartedly agree with. I think everyone is entitled to earn income from their ideas..

But.. this brings me full circle.. Activision did not come up with the idea for the game, did not design the original controller.. they bought a company, Red Octane, who owned intellectual property. They are reaping the benefit of their investment.. I'm cool with that.

But what I am not cool with, is their audacity in presuming to tell me, as a consumer, that I can not use the product they have released in any way that they do not explicitely allow. That is apparently their right by law.. or at least in Sony's eyes apparently.. but that does not make it right.

.. The only leverage we, as consumers, have is the money in our pockets and our ability to, in turn, hurt or help the sales of those company's products we endorse or deride.
>/rant off<

.. and to really rub the burn in.. my choice in hardware console is the core of the issue. Had I chosen an XBox360, I wouldn't be ranting.. hehe.

darknessmoon

01-25-2008, 02:47 PM

So here comes the moral of the story. Buy Rock Band, don't buy Guitar Hero 3. But if you're at this forum, most likely it's already too late. :\

I fall in the Vast Minority that you speak of. Screw GH3. I bought RB for the drums, but since it came with a guitar, it's allowed me to finally do something about my curiosity of how it's like to play something like GH, but not by playing GH...

Soccer arguably isn't a sport, but Fifa can't compete with Winning 11.

LMAO! Are you kidding me? You're telling me that Football (as the name of the sport is known everywhere around the world except the U.S.), the ONLY sport that is played and celebrated by almost every single country in the world and features a tournament in which the whole world competes to qualify to participate in, is arguably NOT a sport?

Let me tell you this: Winners of the NFL are NOT world champions. They don't play around the world; they are winners of the US league (not even American League, as America is a continent, not a country).

Winners of the NBA are not world champions either. Same as above. (And don't tell me anything about the Olympics. The US gathers the best of the best for the Basketball Olympics and they STILL lose).

Soccer... What the hell is soccer? As I said, it's FOOTBALL all over the world. I don't understand how the US came up with a sport and decided to call it football: the name of a pre-existing sport, to be used for a sport that requires minimal use of the foot to control the ball (don't say anything about running, lol) and the TWO people that DO use their foot, are usually the most mocked and picked on players of a team... The irony of it all is just baffling...

Anyway, I'm off topic and I'm ranting too much. Carry on...

kaiserkreb

01-25-2008, 03:30 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by toefer2
Soccer arguably isn't a sport, but Fifa can't compete with Winning 11.

LMAO! Are you kidding me? You're telling me that Football (as the name of the sport is known everywhere around the world except the U.S.), the ONLY sport that is played and celebrated by almost every single country in the world and features a tournament in which the whole world competes to qualify to participate in, is arguably NOT a sport?

lol, I was going to mention this as well as I'm VERY curious to see what argument could be made against "soccer" being a sport. That's about as nonsensical as the statement someone made that ps3 owners don't like sports games.
*roflcopter*

Bu11ze1

01-25-2008, 03:34 PM

that poor horse has had the **** kicked out of it. News flash: Harmonix doesn't care, EA doesn't care, Activision doesn't care, and Sony doesn't care. We got screwed. The end.

rickboot

01-25-2008, 03:38 PM

why doesn't hmx just add a controller mapping routine to the game so that you can plug in a gh3 controller and just map the controls to whatever works for rockband?

I agree. I suggested this a while ago:
http://www.rockband.com/forums/showthread.php?p=232787#post232787

I agree that Sony and HMX can't just release a patch now that Activision is in the loop. I also agree that Sony should police their platform better like MS.

I have an idea for a legal patch. HMX could release a patch that provides a controller setup wizard that allows users to configure most standard USB controllers.

1. User applies patch, plugs in their guitar and selects the controller setup wizard.
2. Setup wizard would then ask user to push a button on the controller to use for guitar.
3. Wizard then asks user to hit buttons for each fret buttons, up/down strums, direction keys, start, etc.

I have configured both the GH3 and RB controllers for the PC and know this *should* work. The only downside may be that users may have to activate Overdrive using the Select button instead of tilt. Whammy with the bar will probably work fine.

This setup would be as simple and as quick as adjusting AV calibration and it would require special code just for GH3 controllers, and may even work with PS2 controllers.

Give me a dev kit and I'll do it!

kaiserkreb

01-25-2008, 03:50 PM

I agree. I suggested this a while ago:
http://www.rockband.com/forums/showthread.php?p=232787#post232787

I agree that Sony and HMX can't just release a patch now that Activision is in the loop. I also agree that Sony should police their platform better like MS.

I have an idea for a legal patch. HMX could release a patch that provides a controller setup wizard that allows users to configure most standard USB controllers.

1. User applies patch, plugs in their guitar and selects the controller setup wizard.
2. Setup wizard would then ask user to push a button on the controller to use for guitar.
3. Wizard then asks user to hit buttons for each fret buttons, up/down strums, direction keys, start, etc.

I have configured both the GH3 and RB controllers for the PC and know this *should* work. The only downside may be that users may have to activate Overdrive using the Select button instead of tilt. Whammy with the bar will probably work fine.

This setup would be as simple and as quick as adjusting AV calibration and it would require special code just for GH3 controllers, and may even work with PS2 controllers.

Give me a dev kit and I'll do it!

+1

I think I read your earlier post and subconsciously regurgitated it here because it's a bloody good idear. Also, for the record, my red octane guitars were always so out of whack with tilt star power, one being uber over sensitive, the other being so ridiculously unsensitive that having to grab the thing by the cord and fling it around my head was the only way to activate it (cool for me, not so much for people on the couch next to me) that I got used to using select anyways. Bring it on!

Kenfucious

01-25-2008, 04:02 PM

Now THAT is a great idea, guys.. I, for one, would love to see it. I mean.. who knows, perhaps we may even be able to work out a way for those old ps2 guitars to work, eh? ;)

kaiserkreb

01-25-2008, 04:14 PM

This is a misconception that I try to correct wherever I see it. North America and South America are continents, but (perhaps paradoxically) America is a country. As a Canadian, I would be hella pissed if someone tried to tell me I was American.

I realize that in past centuries Europeans used the word "America" to refer to the new world, but in the 20th century the USA staked a permanent claim on the terms "America" and "American" (and as we all know, the definition of a word is determined by its current usage).

HI FELLOW CANADIAN!! :D Greetings from stupid cold ass Saskatchewan. lol

MF-PO'd

01-25-2008, 04:17 PM

Makes me think Harmonix deep down doesn't really want their patch to go through despite their public statements. Isn't it better for them if they sell more Strats afterall?

jrinck

01-25-2008, 04:41 PM

My thoughts from another thread...

It may not be greed. With EA/Harmonix unable to deliver standalone guitars, it is pretty much impossible for the average person to form a complete band in their home. You need two guitars. If Activision allowed the patch, then they would be doing EA a HUGE favor.

I think Activision isn't allowing the patch for their own marketing reasons--they can claim that EA/Harmonix can't deliver the true Rock Band experience at this time, which is true.

But once third party controllers come out, Activision will relent, as then the competitive edge is over.

So it's not greed. It's all just business! :)

slickpitt

01-25-2008, 04:54 PM

I just think we deserve an update of SOME sort from HMX. A "we're still trying to hash things out with Activision" or a "F Activision, you're gonna just have to wait for a standalone guitar" would work.

jrinck

01-25-2008, 04:58 PM

I have no idea what you could mean by that - isn't greed a desire to make as much money as possible? Isn't that the goal of a business?

Ideally, yes, but corporate egos can often get in the way of that. Activision would prefer that NOBODY buys Rock Band, and instead buys GH3. Any legal way that they can hurt Rock Band sales they will do, and this is one really big way.

silvam14

01-25-2008, 05:02 PM

Frederf

01-25-2008, 06:33 PM

Activision's only "right" to prevent compatibility is might. Sony doesn't want to distribute a patch because Activision, appearantly a big cash cow for low brow console games, would get pissy... er.

The only legal basis on which a patch might be prevented would be that every GH3 customer agreed to "Only use guitar hero controllers with guitar hero games, cross my heart, hope to die" and a patch for that compatibility would serve no practical purpose but to facilitate breach of contract. However I don't see how well that would stand up in court.

It's all disgusting though, the idea that RedOctane/Activision have the "right" to determine how and if you use your purchased video game controller is laughable. It's truly sad how many people swallow the concept of a company's right to engineer your spending, use, and life so readily. I have to ask: What kind of precedent there is for this kind of restriction, anywhere?

Also what's ridiculous is Harmonix's tight lip about all this. Do they consider the matter closed? Are they working on it? Is there an impropriety that they don't want brought to light? Harmonix seems to want compatibility genuinely, maybe not because they love everyone and fart sunshine, but because they feel that making a pleasant environment for the customer where they aren't whipped randomly by corporate shortsighted restrictions breeds happier, more enthusiastic customers which are ultimately more spendy and loyal. Dat's cool with me.

Another massive failure is Sony who have missed the concept that have made Apple, Nintendo, and other companies so successful: Pay attention to the final, end-user experience. Get your foot in often and make things right. Make standards and keep your 2nd and 3rd parties to them. Apple and Nintendo have repeatedly been accused of being fascist and over-controlling, but note how their end-products are cohesive and give a pleasant end-user experience. Sure MacBook costs more than other laptops but people buy it anyway because it's not just a microchasm of the industry but a genuinely cohesive and functional piece of engineering.

Frederf

01-25-2008, 07:38 PM

MF-PO'd

01-25-2008, 07:41 PM

Rock Band's not going to fail, it's new, it's got HMX, there are so many places to go. Guitar Hero is at the end of its life, any game will be after 4 versions and a developer hand off. Can you just see the features of GH4 in your head now? More metal! More stupid achievements! 7-note chords! Gameplay that has little or nothing to do with music! TV goes click.

While agree with you that Rock Band isn't going to fail, I don't think Guitar Hero is going anywhere any time soon. It has too large of a fan base that enjoys the game. Heck, I think Activision is the devil, but I still play and enjoy Guitar Hero. (that may be partially because I can't play RB yet, mind you)

mercuryshadow09

01-25-2008, 08:28 PM

To all the lawyer's and complainer's , wake up , i think it's time we be heard , if we let this go on it could become standard practice , do you want to have to buy a different controller for every game you buy?

Activision's website!
http://www.activision.com/index.html#contact|en_US

Gryffindor

01-25-2008, 08:50 PM

After owning RB are you really going to go out and buy GH4 (should it come out)? Look how horrible and slowly the DLC is coming out for GH3!

Personally, I HATE the GH3 LP. It feels tiny and toy like. I don't need the annoying clicking sound to keep time.

Once you get your hands on a GOOD Strat you'll never go back.

TheBends

01-25-2008, 08:59 PM

people have hacked it and made their own patches. just find one.

mastershadow64

01-25-2008, 09:13 PM

people have hacked it and made their own patches. just find one.

If there was a patch out it would be huge news.

Scrag85

01-25-2008, 10:26 PM

Man activision can go f**k themselves, i really hate Guitar *****o, but i do want to use the guitar for ROCK BAND!!! Activision should get over the fact harmonix have beaten them with a game equal & better than their's & has singing & drums too!!. BOO YAA!!!!

HeadHunter67

01-26-2008, 12:10 AM

Whether we like it or not (and I don't), Activision owns that technology and so they get to decide how it's used. That's what licensing agreements are all about. If you invented something and a competitor wanted to use it with no compensation to you, you'd feel the same way.

I'd gather that is the reason why the RB guitar won't work on GH, either - because the technology is just different enough to bypass the patent on the GH controllers.

Maybe Activision is asking for more than Harmonix thinks is fair - I can imagine there is some bad blood because now they are competitors - but we can't know for certain because neither party is talking to the public about it, likely for legal reasons.

Notwithstanding all that, Activision is foolish to be so obstinate, in my opinion. The end result is more sales if the products were compatible! How can that be a bad thing? The only answer that I can possibly imagine, is that doing so would leave Activision's patents vulnerable to challenge by Harmonix and third-party manufacturers.

Suffice to say, consumers and producers will always have different views on intellectual property. Once you make something unique of your own, you gain a different view on the matter, trust me.

HeadHunter67

01-26-2008, 01:18 AM

So since Nissan owns the technology in my car, do they get to decide which roads I'm allowed to drive it on?
No... but they DO get to decide who makes products that utilize their prorietary technology. If someone wanted to mae another product that used a Nissan engine ( a more accurate analogy) then Nissan would have certain legal rights to determine if and how it was used, and what compensation they would be entitled to.

Harmonix isn't trying to use Activision's technology, they are simply trying to make their own product interoperable with Activision's existing product - that's very different.
I'm honestly not sure exactly how different. Let's consider this - if Activision didn't have any legal right to do so, Harmonix could just go ahead and do it and Activision would have no recourse. But Harmonix isn't... so it's apparent that someone's got some leverage on them somehow.

I'd like to see increased compatibility because it inevitably leads to a broader user base and more sales of products. That's win-win in my book. For those of you who read Penny Arcade (http://www.penny-arcade.com/2007/12/17#1197878400), I'm inclined to side with Tycho... but I admit that Gabe has a valid point. What we want and what we're legally entitled to, seem to be very different.

HeadHunter67

01-26-2008, 01:53 AM

So why isn't Harmonix taking theissue to court? Sounds like the kind of business practices that Microsoft used to get fined for.

There's more to this than either side is telling, you can be sure of that.

Ventura

01-26-2008, 02:16 AM

There's more to this than either side is telling, you can be sure of that.

No doubt about that.

Makes me laugh though how a Harmonix employee said something to the effect that "we've got the customer's side in all of this", and yet here we are, something like a month and a half later, begging for someone from Harmonix to give us an update.

If you've got our side, fellas, you're sure going out of your way to make it look like that's not the case.

Guitar Hero 1 and 2 are great games. Rock Band is a great game. But this company's unwillingness to talk to us has got to be getting on most people's nerves, especially if this situation is one that inconveniences you.

MF-PO'd

01-26-2008, 02:22 AM

No doubt about that.

Makes me laugh though how a Harmonix employee said something to the effect that "we've got the customer's side in all of this", and yet here we are, something like a month and a half later, begging for someone from Harmonix to give us an update.

If you've got our side, fellas, you're sure going out of your way to make it look like that's not the case.

Guitar Hero 1 and 2 are great games. Rock Band is a great game. But this company's unwillingness to talk to us has got to be getting on most people's nerves, especially if this situation is one that inconveniences you.

I have to agree. I really felt in the beginning these guys were on our side. Now I feel ignored and unimportant.

Frederf

01-26-2008, 06:19 AM

Ventura

01-26-2008, 07:15 AM

If I plucked a Nissan engine out of a Nissan car and put it in another car I own, Nissan wouldn't have a legal leg to stand on saying I couldn't do that. However this seems perfectly OK to restrict when it comes to video game controllers? I think not.

Yeah this isn't a legal issue. It's a "Sony doesn't have any balls because they let Activision dictate to them" issue.

I'd love to see Harmonix say to them "So you're gonna let Activision dictate when we can and can't patch our own game? Fine, Rock Band 2 will be a 360 exclusive".

Sony made a mistake. They should've said to Activision "if they want to patch their game on our system, we're not going to get in the way. If you have a problem, you need to speak to them".

But no. Sony are a bunch of gutless idiots, and even though I own Rock Band on the PS3, I hope the 360 continues to outsell it in 2008.

dfjdejulio

01-26-2008, 09:14 AM

Let's consider this - if Activision didn't have any legal right to do so, Harmonix could just go ahead and do it and Activision would have no recourse. But Harmonix isn't... so it's apparent that someone's got some leverage on them somehow.

Flawed reasoning -- the leverage that someone has on someone else is, Activision has leverage on Sony.

Remember, any patch to a PS3 game, especially an online one, has to go through Sony. Activision "persuaded" Sony to block the patch -- the patch that would make RB on the PS3 work the way it already does on the PS2 and XB360!

It is very easy to believe that the leverage that Activision has over Sony is that of the largest game publisher on earth over the console manufacturer that's in a distant third place in this generation's console war. There's no real reason to believe that legality is entering into it at all. If Activision can get Sony to blink without any legal threats, that's good enough, and they don't even have to talk to Harmonix to block the patch.

MF-PO'd

01-26-2008, 11:32 AM

I'm not really buying the leverage argument. Sony has the means if they wanted to stand up to Activision. The last time I checked, Sony still owns the PS2, and Activision is still making a crapload of money from that platform with Guitar Hero at least. I know the PS2 will be going away, but I'm sure GH4 and any other GH spinoffs they have planned for this year will still be big sellers.

Sony is just being gutless and sitting on the fence trying not to rock the boat. Too bad they are letting their customers suffer as a result. They should be standing up for US above anyone else.

HeadHunter67

01-26-2008, 12:00 PM

If I plucked a Nissan engine out of a Nissan car and put it in another car I own, Nissan wouldn't have a legal leg to stand on saying I couldn't do that. However this seems perfectly OK to restrict when it comes to video game controllers? I think not.

You're perfectly within your rights to modify the guitar controllers you own and/or hack your console to get them to work for the game, and all you'd risk is your warranty.

This is different - the more apt comparison would be putting Nissan engines in other cars and then selling a couple million of them. Still think Nissan wouldn't care?

Remember, any patch to a PS3 game, especially an online one, has to go through Sony.
It doesn't have to, it's just the most common and effective means of transmitting the patch to the greatest number of users with the least expense. Harmonix could put the patch on a disc and enclose it in a magazine, or send it to all registered owners of the PS3 version, or set up a hotline where users can call and order the patch disc.

If Activision or Sony could do anything to stop that, then legality does enter into it. If it's not a matter where Activision has the law on their side, Harmonix could say "we're doing this anyhow, try and stop us".

Perhaps the leverage is financial and might affect future business, I don't know. But if it's not a legal matter then it means that Harmonix is choosing to let producers, not consumers, determine its course of business.

Dannick

01-26-2008, 12:14 PM

Whoa. Calm down. If you read my entire post you'd see I included:

Sure it was generalized (in reference to my PS3 owners/EA Sports line), but ridiculous? I don't think so. But to each his own.

I like sports games as much as the next guy, and they tend to make up a majority of my video game collection. But I don't know what games you've been playing if you think EA Sports is producing quality PS3 products.

Madden 08 was a step back from Madden 07, which in itself had issues. NASCAR 08 was just...wow. Live has been the crappier NBA game for a few years running, though this year it improved. Soccer arguably isn't a sport, but Fifa can't compete with Winning 11. Their baseball games had way too many homeruns, so luckily they can't make them anymore. Tiger Woods is good, I guess. But it has no competition. And there are probably others, but you get the point.

Granted, none of that has to do specifically with the PS3, but with the PS3 versions, you tend to get a crappier version (compared to the 360 one) of an already lackluster game. The problem is that so long as people like you, presumably, go out and buy all the new titles each year, EA has no incentive to make them any better.

Thank god I like hockey games, thats one sports game EA does extremely well!

Mickey Buns

01-26-2008, 12:16 PM

How about no one here really knows, and we could post and guess here to the end time. One thing is for sure it's about $$$$

Sarge51

01-26-2008, 12:17 PM

It's really a shame though that Sony can't just allow the patch to be released. If I were MTV Games, I would kindly let Sony know that future games published by MTV Games will be 360 exclusives if they can't even release all their patches for their own games on the PS3. Maybe something like that would cause Sony to buckle to pressure from the side of MTV Games/HMX for once.

Hell yeah! I'm cool with that!

Links_Padawan

01-26-2008, 03:50 PM

Since all this is about $$$$, and Activision wants to get paid for the use of their peripherals but harmonix doesn't want to pay. Why dont they put the compatibility patch up for sale. I'd definitely buy it! That way Activision gets paid, Harmonix wont have to pay, we get to use the les paul, and it will probably be cheaper than buying a new strat. If that doesn't solve the issue then i think that they just wanna sell more strats.

HeadHunter67

01-26-2008, 04:05 PM

I think that's exactly what it comes down to. They'd rather get more money from us than have to give money to Activision. Every non-RB guitar we use is a piece of the pie that they're not getting a cut from.

IIxAMP3DxII

01-26-2008, 05:38 PM

Wait, what patch was released on the 360 and not PS3?

MF-PO'd

01-26-2008, 05:45 PM

Wait, what patch was released on the 360 and not PS3?

There was no 360 patch. The compatibility worked right out of the box (which it should have also done on the PS3). The patch that was created to make the PS3 equal to the 360 in terms of guitar compatibility was challenged by Activision.

I think it's safe to say if the guitar wasn't compatible on the 360, and Harmonix developed a post-release patch for it that Activision would have challenged it too? I wonder...

dfjdejulio

01-26-2008, 06:17 PM

Harmonix could put the patch on a disc and enclose it in a magazine, or send it to all registered owners of the PS3 version, or set up a hotline where users can call and order the patch disc.

I do not understand why some people believe this.

This is an online game that runs on Sony's network. Sony has to keep tight control over exactly what versions connect to the network. I know on the XBox, if people connect with what looks from Microsoft's point of view like a hacked version of a game (eg. a patch that didn't go through their certification process), Microsoft can blacklist both the gamertag and console via which it was attempted so that neither can make any use of their network anymore. They've done it before. And I would assume that the same is true of Sony; they don't want cheaters hacking their network, so they keep very tight control over exactly what versions of games are permitted to connect to the network.

But if it's not a legal matter then it means that Harmonix is choosing to let producers, not consumers, determine its course of business.

We know that they've finished the patch and submitted it to Sony, and Sony is refusing to let it go through. There is literally nothing Harmonix can do to get a PS3 patch out if Sony does not want it to go out.

Frederf

01-26-2008, 06:23 PM

This is different - the more apt comparison would be putting Nissan engines in other cars and then selling a couple million of them. Still think Nissan wouldn't care?

Ok I admit, my analogy is not appropriate but neither is yours. HMX is not trying to integrate the Les Paul and sell it as their product, but neither is this a single end user diddling with their hardware. A much better analogy would be a kit car manufacture making an engine-less kit car that was compatible with a Nissan engine. I'm not sure about how much agreement a kit car manufacture needs from an engine manufacture but I'm guessing slim to none.

It doesn't have to, it's just the most common and effective means of transmitting the patch to the greatest number of users with the least expense. Harmonix could put the patch on a disc and enclose it in a magazine, or send it to all registered owners of the PS3 version, or set up a hotline where users can call and order the patch disc.

If Activision or Sony could do anything to stop that, then legality does enter into it. If it's not a matter where Activision has the law on their side, Harmonix could say "we're doing this anyhow, try and stop us".

I'm not sure putting the patch on a disk would bypass Sony's approval.

Perhaps the leverage is financial and might affect future business, I don't know. But if it's not a legal matter then it means that Harmonix is choosing to let producers, not consumers, determine its course of business.

That's goofy reasoning. Being bullied by other producers does not translate into choosing to let producers determine the course of their business. What is voluntary on HMX's part here?

Totalfailure

01-26-2008, 06:32 PM

You'd have to ask Sony. Nobody else knows.

It's kinda absurd that Sony is letting Activision get away with this. It's pretty clearly hurting Sony. People are choosing the XBox 360 over the PS3 because of this issue.

You bet they are....I'm one of them. I own both systems, so why punish myself with the PS3 guitar incompatability issues when you don't have to?

espher

01-26-2008, 06:51 PM

This is different - the more apt comparison would be putting Nissan engines in other cars and then selling a couple million of them. Still think Nissan wouldn't care?

Harmonix is bundling Les Pauls with Rock Band?

It doesn't have to, it's just the most common and effective means of transmitting the patch to the greatest number of users with the least expense. Harmonix could put the patch on a disc and enclose it in a magazine, or send it to all registered owners of the PS3 version, or set up a hotline where users can call and order the patch disc.

I'm sure you would be able to play online and download content with an unauthorized patch. Homebrew software and the like is definitely encouraged by Sony.

hodayathink

01-26-2008, 07:03 PM

Harmonix is bundling Les Pauls with Rock Band?

I'm sure you would be able to play online and download content with an unauthorized patch. Homebrew software and the like is definitely encouraged by Sony.
There's a difference between encouraged and not fought against. Sony doesn't want people running hacked and homebrew games on their network just like any other video game company. IIRC, most sony updates to the PSP break the homebrew stuff, but the hackers just re-break their code and put it up immediately after. If they allowed hacks, it would create things like aimbots and wall hacks for first person shooters, which no one thinks is fair. And even in the case of PSP homebrew, none of that stuff actually runs on the Sony OS. What happens is that the PSP loads a different OS and runs code off of that. So, basically, there is pretty much no way that Sony allows an unsigned patch for one of it's games to connect to the network.

MartyMcFly77

01-26-2008, 07:06 PM

Blame Activision, blame Activision blah blah blah.

Seriously, Harmonix has you ALL brainwashed.

Blame Harmonix, they shipped the game without the option, they had PLENTY of opportunity to do so, same with voice chat on PS3, no reason we shouldnt have this. Three exclusive songs for 360, notice NOTHING for PS3.

Everybody is all jumping for joy that March and or April are not that far away.
For what?! So you all can be had again! Thats right! Your all beeing fooled AGAIN!

Harmonix says Activision wants to be compensated for the use of THIER Les Paul, yet Harmonix doesnt want to pay. Although on that OTHER system, right out of the box ALL guitars work, has Activision gone out of thier way to stop 360 users from using thier guitar? Nope, not at all.

So you see mindless sheep, instead of Harmonix paying the bill. YOU ARE!
Yep they conviently passed the bill to you. 65$ for another crappy guitar.
Thats the price of a new game. Why are WE beeing forced to pay MORE when most of us OWN a perfectly good second guitar controller. One that already cost us 100$.

If Harmonix really gave a crap about us PS3 people, all these issues I spoke of would be fixed already. Instead almost TWO months later we are still waiting on word of said patch.

They really need to change the packaging of the game, for one the PS3 version does NOT work with ANY guitars but the Strat. Second the PS3 version is NOWAY the same as the 360 version. We are missing TO MANY important options. Stop billing this game as identical to the 360 version, obviously it is NOT.

BTW PS3 people, ask the HMX people on these forums to log online and play a friendly game with you. See what they say.

Quinarvy

01-26-2008, 07:40 PM

Um, how is this a legal issue? Harmonix makes patch once hey get their hands on a Les Paul for the PS3 (they could not have made it work out of the box, the game was already in production and they didn't want to delay the Ps3 version of the game). They then submit the patch to Sony, who clears it, but won't release it because Activision says no. Lets look at the fight from all angles.

Sony: If they release the patch, they anger Activision, who could take away some very successful franchises if they pleased. By not releasing the patch they might anger MTV Games (EA is only the distributer, NOT publisher) who's only bargaining chip is really Rock Band 2. By leaving it at a standstill and letting MTV and Activision work things out, they stay out of the way of getting either mad at them.

Harmonix: Made a patch to let the PS3 Les Paul worked with Rock Band. They probably see it as "We made a patch that lets your guitar work with our game, we gain no money from this, only customer satisfaction."

Activision: I don't know how they can see this other then making Rock Band an incomplete product until Nyko or MadCatz release their guitars. They basically will only let it happen if they gain money from not just the customers who are buying the guitar (and Guitar Hero 3 itself) but they want Harmonix to take a monetary hit (I'm assuming they are asking for something that's unreasonable) as well.

Ventura

01-26-2008, 09:27 PM

Blame Harmonix, they shipped the game without the option, they had PLENTY of opportunity to do so, same with voice chat on PS3, no reason we shouldnt have this. Three exclusive songs for 360, notice NOTHING for PS3.

If Sony blocked your patch for your game on their network, would you go out of your way to create exclusive content for that version of the game? I know I wouldn't.

Frederf

01-26-2008, 09:37 PM

Blame Activision, blame Activision blah blah blah. Seriously, Harmonix has you ALL brainwashed.

Blame Harmonix, {{#1 they shipped the game without the option, they had PLENTY of opportunity to do so #1}}, same with voice chat on PS3, no reason we shouldn't have this. Three exclusive songs for 360, notice NOTHING for PS3.

Everybody is all jumping for joy that March and or April are not that far away.
For what?! So you all can be had again! Thats right! Your all being fooled AGAIN!

{{#2 Harmonix says Activision wants to be compensated for the use of THIER Les Paul, yet Harmonix doesn't want to pay. #2}} {{ #3 Although on that OTHER system, right out of the box ALL guitars work, has Activision gone out of their way to stop 360 users from using their guitar? Nope, not at all. #3}}

{{ #4 So you see mindless sheep, instead of Harmonix paying the bill. YOU ARE! #4}}
Yep they conveniently passed the bill to you. 65$ for another crappy guitar.
Thats the price of a new game. Why are WE being forced to pay MORE when most of us OWN a perfectly good second guitar controller. One that already cost us 100$.

If Harmonix really gave a crap about us PS3 people, all these issues I spoke of would be fixed already. Instead almost TWO months later we are still waiting on word of said patch.

{{ #5 They really need to change the packaging of the game, for one the PS3 version does NOT work with ANY guitars but the Strat. Second the PS3 version is NO WAY the same as the 360 version. We are missing TO MANY important options. Stop billing this game as identical to the 360 version, obviously it is NOT. #5}}

{{ #6 BTW PS3 people, ask the HMX people on these forums to log online and play a friendly game with you. See what they say. #6}}

#1: Harmonix had no opportunity to forcibly make the PS3 Les Paul compatible with Rock Band. Due to the way the PS3 controller scheme is coded you need either cooperation from the other company (didn't happen) or to reverse engineer an existing product (RB code finalized by that point).

#2: Of course HMX doesn't want to pay, for the same reason you aren't paying me for the right to breathe; it would be a horrible precedent and you shouldn't have to.

#3: The only guitars that don't work for PS3 are the Guitar Hero controllers. the Nyko works on both systems, the Madcatz works on both systems, the Rock Band works on both systems. Activision only didn't prevent Xbox360 Les Paul compatibility because they couldn't. Their motivation was plenty high to do so.

#4: It is ridiculous to expect HMX to throw itself in front of Activision's gravy train. Being indignant that HMX didn't do something heroic to intercede Activision's screwing of the customer base is idiotic.

#5: The PS3 version works with all controllers except the GH ones. The PS3 and Xbox 360 versions of Rock Band are not marketed as identical. I don't know where you're getting that from, they clearly say PS3 or Xbox 360 on the box.

#6 The HMX people would assuredly have access to both the PS3 and the Xbox 360 version at work.

Ventura

01-26-2008, 09:49 PM

#6 The HMX people would assuredly have access to both the PS3 and the Xbox 360 version at work.

What he meant was, because of the lack of online chat, a Harmonix employee is never gonna show up for a few rounds on the PS3 network when he can just play on the 360. You said it yourself, after all, he's got access to both :)

Frederf

01-26-2008, 10:24 PM

I knew I was gunna catch flak on that last one. Honestly I had about 3 phone calls and just came back to an open forum window and hit "Submit Reply" without finishing that thought.

The PS3 is certainly worse for wear when it comes to Rock Band, but I don't attribute any of that to developer malevolence. The Les Paul issue is biased in the Xbox's favor not because the HMX devs really like the Xbox but because of how the Xbox is forced to work by Microsoft's design.

The in-game chat is due to how much simpler and uniform the Xbox's voice chat feature is to implement into a game. That's not to say that HMX is off the hook for getting the chat feature to work in the PS3 environment. On that same front it's in need of addressing the fact that in a Gold/guest combination in Xbox the Gold member cannot voice chat.

I struggle to come up with any more reasons why the PS3 has gotten shafted over the Xbox version. An example of the reverse is the wireless Strat which is due to Microsoft's uncooperation when it comes to 3rd party wireless controllers. Again, it's all forces well beyond any personal motives of any HMX employee. If you want to be mad, be mad at Sony, Microsoft, and Activision.

MF-PO'd

01-26-2008, 10:37 PM

#3: The only guitars that don't work for PS3 are the Guitar Hero controllers. the Nyko works on both systems, the Madcatz works on both systems, the Rock Band works on both systems. Activision only didn't prevent Xbox360 Les Paul compatibility because they couldn't. Their motivation was plenty high to do so.

Actually, that is not true. The Madcatz controller is a Rock Band only device. Nyko is has been advertising their guitar as the _only_ one that works with both games. Now... either they are arrogant in making a bold assumption that the patch won't get released before their guitar or they have some inside exclusivity information.

In any case, there's still nothing on the market right now that can be used with Rock Band outside of dropping $170 for a bundle. By the time there is an option, over 4 months will have passed since the release of Rock Band.

Frederf

01-27-2008, 01:19 AM

MF-PO'd

01-27-2008, 02:31 AM

My bad, yeah the Nyko has a physical switch so it's more like 2 controllers in one and not a cross-compatible controller. Also the MadCatz is Rock Band only for much the same reason as the Stratocaster is RB only.

That's entirely true that right now the only PS3 Rock Band controller is a Stratocaster but none of that is HMX's fault. If HMX/EA had a few thousand Stratocasters laying around they'd be just overjoyed to sell you one.

But who's fault is it then (if not Harmonix') that they can't produce Strats quickly enough? I think they have to take the responsibility there because no one forced them to sell a piece of the product before the rest of it was ready to complete the experience.

HeadHunter67

01-27-2008, 02:50 AM

I guess this is one of the very few cases where the PS2 version is preferable to the PS3. At least I can use my GH guitar too.

I suspect that one of the reasons that the XBox doesn't have this issue is that Activision can't put pressure on Microsoft the way it does to Sony. M$ is too big and powerful to let anyone tell them what to do - they have thumbed their noses at federal governments, Activision is small potatoes by comparison. And threatening to pull future versions from XBox isn't going to scare them either - they probably have a better stable of developer companies than Activision and a history for making their own game if they can't get someone else's.

Or better yet, they'd simply decide to acquire Activision and then Sony would be the one left out in the cold.

Far-fetched, perhaps, but it could happen. :cool:

Quinarvy

01-27-2008, 02:58 AM

King_Nuthin

01-27-2008, 05:36 AM

MF-PO'd

01-27-2008, 12:35 PM

Sony may be the bigger company on paper but many of their divisions haven't been profitable in years. The PlayStation was one of the divisions that the company counted on over the last decade and so far the PS3 hasn't lived up to expectations.

Which is exactly why Activision can push Sony around and not Microsoft. Not developing for the third place console could bury it. Not developing for the first place console would be cutting off your nose to spite your face.

But Sony isn't just about the PS3. They have leverage with the PS2 since that's a very important console to Activision. GH still sells like crazy on PS2. If Sony wanted to stand up to Activision, they certainly could.

Besides, as long as Activision makes any money at all on the PS3 (even if not as much as on the 360 right now), it's a stupid move financially to pull software from a console. I'm sure the investors would not be pleased.

BigBadFatKid

01-27-2008, 12:39 PM

dfjdejulio

01-27-2008, 01:48 PM

I don't know how the idiots behind activision haven't realized there making a mistake yet, no one that has a PS3 (like me) is EVER going to buy ANY activision game again. you cant give the 360 the patch, even if all controllers are compatible on all games or whatever u guys say its not fair, its almost like there doing this as a joke to get laughs its so stupid.

Eh, just you wait.

As soon as third party or standalone guitars have been out long enough to effectively end the main problem RB has on the PS3 right now, see if Activision doesn't relent and permit the patch to go through without compensation, and state so publicly, just so they can appear to be "good guys". Some weaselish management folks at Activision believe this is their best chance to have their cake and eat it too, I bet.

And it might work. How many people will sustain their boycotts once that happens? Most won't.

(Man, I wish Sony would grow some cojones here. I am half convinced that this problem is more Sony's fault than Activision's.)

MF-PO'd

01-27-2008, 02:08 PM

Eh, just you wait.

As soon as third party or standalone guitars have been out long enough to effectively end the main problem RB has on the PS3 right now, see if Activision doesn't relent and permit the patch to go through without compensation, and state so publicly, just so they can appear to be "good guys". Some weaselish management folks at Activision believe this is their best chance to have their cake and eat it to, I bet.

And it might work. How many people will sustain their boycotts once that happens? Most won't.

(Man, I wish Sony would grow some cojones here. I am half convinced that this problem is more Sony's fault than Activision's.)

Knowing Activision, imagine if they have the press release already typed up under some file: To be released April 2. :eek:

If they do decide to do that, they will probably be stabbing Nyko in the back who I can only assume paid them a handsome sum for their guitar to work in Guitar Hero and be able to market it as the only guitar to work in both games. It would effectively render their switch that comes with it useless and likely make the guitar inferior to the Les Paul would would accomplish the same thing without the use of a switch.

RockBand.com