My theory for duplicate songs

[cmg4894]

Ok, most of us are really stoked of all the new songs announced today. But I have heard some complaining on why more duplicate songs. Here is my theory. If this has been said before sorry and if it gets locked, oh well.

I think these songs were already in the works before the Activision/HMX split. They were either done and no license acquired yet, somewhat complete, or cut due to space. I think HMX didn't want to do GHIII. I think they had the idea of Rock Band and wanted to go that way. Give up the franchise. Now, Activision didn't want to let their hot young franchise die. So, they went different ways.

This brings up the duplicates. I have a feeling that Activision kept the rights to the songs but HMX kept the code. Now, when Activision went to Neversoft with the game and the rights to these songs. All they had to do was code them (I know that is a lot involved, I'm not making light of that). HMX had these songs coded and no rights so they got them. I think coding them/ getting the rights was a 50/50 effort.

I don't think it will happen if there is GHIV or RBII. Just a little hold over from the split. This is just a theory and doesn't mean much. I'm just wondering if you people thinks it makes sense.

[IErrantVentureI]

Makes sense to me. I was wondering that myself, and if no one can give a better explanation, I'll take yours. :)

[Brock_Landers]

I also think that from a record labels position (and GH/RB developers partially), you can justify selling the same song to two seperate companies when the games are coming out just a few months in between... but it's a lot harder to sell the same song to two different companies (and the public) with say a year's time between them.

IE. If GH4 was announced next year with Don't Fear The Reaper we'd all be like "lol, I'm supposed to care?".. Thus Activision/Neversoft wouldn't want to license it; the record labels lose out on a potential sale by giving different songs to each company at once.

Of course Rock Band has extra features and DLC so it could push a GH3 track later on and still get over... but it still loses a lot of the punch of an all new track.

That said, I'm sure there also were some "this is what we'd like to get for the next game" that carried over into GH4 when Harmonix left, like the OP suggests.

[admanimal]

The reason there are duplicate songs is almost certainly that the record labels are only willing to license certain songs for certain bands. So if Harmonix and Neversoft both want to have the Smashing Pumpkins, for example, they are both going to have to take Cherub Rock if it is the only (good) song the label wants to license.

Brock may be correct about why the labels are only willing to license certain songs (at least for now).

[sushi111]

Well I think Cherub Rock, Paranoid, Sabotage, reptillia, and Missippi Queen were much better choices for Rock Band than GH3. They Could have picked Geek USA, NIB, Fight For Your right, and Juicebox and that would have made a lot more sense.

[Eman311]

Well I think Cherub Rock, Paranoid, Sabotage, reptillia, and Missippi Queen were much better choices for Rock Band than GH3. They Could have picked Geek USA, NIB, Fight For Your right, and Juicebox and that would have made a lot more sense.

see but the songs also have to be recognizable. The ones in the game are instantly noticeable to the mildest fans of those bands. The ones you posted aren't AS recognizable.

Gotta view it as a band playing a radio festival, you're only gonna be getting the greatest hits setlist.

[parastroke7]

Geek USA would've made MUCH more sense...but NOOOOO...had to pick Cherub Rock. However, I have a feeling that we'll see Geek USA in the DLC, since it's on the same album as Cherub Rock.

[_Five_]

Sounds all very plausible to me. Hmmm :-S

[ocfanman]

Sounds all very plausible to me. Hmmm :-S

I agree and believe but overall, I really dont care since im not buying guitar hero 3, so yay for me

[UkuleleSHIMA_2]

I also hope this is an isolated incident for this year. If RB only has 40 songs and I've already played 5 of them to death on GHIII that only makes 35 new songs for me to enjoy on RB when it comes out a month later.

I wouldn't mind if the dupes came out as DLC because then I could choose whether I wanted them. Some GH songs I wouldn't mind playing drums or singing to, ya know?

Maybe EA and Activision should form the "Music Game Collition" where reps from each company debate and decide which game will get which songs so there's no dupes! :D

[McDeezy]

I think of it this way. Even if we do have duplicate songs. Theres always DLC to smoke GH3 :)

[Sonofmogh]

Quite Frankly, IMO the duplication started with Guitar Hero 3 stealing songs from RB and I think Harmonix purposely went after some of GH3s list to throw a flying "F*** You!" in the faces of Neversoft and Red Octane! I really couldn't care less...I'm getting both and I know that RB will make good on the Download side of things so...do whatever they want...if HMX feels "cherub rock" or whatever is a good song for rock band...go for it, I've never heard it so I'll have to check it out first.

[G_tarRoCK3R]

Quite Frankly, IMO the duplication started with Guitar Hero 3 stealing songs from RB and I think Harmonix purposely went after some of GH3s list to throw a flying "F*** You!" in the faces of Neversoft and Red Octane! I really couldn't care less...I'm getting both and I know that RB will make good on the Download side of things so...do whatever they want...if HMX feels "cherub rock" or whatever is a good song for rock band...go for it, I've never heard it so I'll have to check it out first.

Guy get your facts straight. Neversoft didn't steal anything, like wise for HXM. The songs were lisenced probably around the same time and the just decided to release them at each owns time. This isn't high school or something, being immature "stealing" are you serious? The bands probably gave the two companies the same song because for what ever reason unknown to us the general public.

Why don't you read the very first post in this thread for vaild reasons why it could have happend.

Think before you post.

[SoraRikuVGM]

Here is the thing about duplicates: Guitar Hero III will always lose to Rock Band. Why? The extra instruments. A whole band beats out Guitar + Bass any time.

[admanimal]

At least three tracks from GH1 (Take Me Out, No One Knows, and Fat Lip) appeared previously in the EA Trax from the NHL series of games. So clearly OMG GH stole songs from EA's NHL series!

Also off the top of my head, Ace of Spades has been in multiple games (Tony Hawk, Burnout Revenge), Heart Full of Black was in Burnout Revenge, and Blitzkreig Bop was also in one of the Tony Hawk games. That must be why Harmonix changed to that song- to stick it to Neversoft :rolleyes:

[Magnet]

This brings up the duplicates. I have a feeling that Activision kept the rights to the songs but HMX kept the code. Now, when Activision went to Neversoft with the game and the rights to these songs. All they had to do was code them (I know that is a lot involved, I'm not making light of that). HMX had these songs coded and no rights so they got them. I think coding them/ getting the rights was a 50/50 effort.

Let's go for a more plausible theory. They (HMX and RedOctane/Activision) probably jointly acquired the rights to the songs when they were just beginning to think about GHIII or another new game a long time ago. The point about coding doesn't even make any sense. It's unlikely Harmonix coded much (if anything) having to do with these songs while they were still with RedOctane. The rights were likely acquired at a very preliminary stage in creating a new game.


I think HMX didn't want to do GHIII. I think they had the idea of Rock Band and wanted to go that way. Give up the franchise. Now, Activision didn't want to let their hot young franchise die. So, they went different ways.

This part is just plain inaccurate. Developers can't develop a game for an existing intellectual property franchise based on "wanting to." Otherwise we might have another Amplitude game to play. :p Harmonix does not own the IP for Guitar Hero. It's that simple. Activision owns the Guitar Hero IP. It's Activision's call on who develops the games. When Harmonix got bought by MTV, their cost for external development went up with it. Activision chose (note that Harmonix had no say in this) to have a cheaper, internal developer (Neversoft) work on the next game. It is definitely within the realm of possibility that Harmonix could be developing both Guitar Hero III and Rock Band had Activision not chosen otherwise.

[admanimal]

Let's go for a more plausible theory. They (HMX and RedOctane/Activision) probably jointly acquired the rights to the songs when they were just beginning to think about GHIII or another new game a long time ago. The point about coding doesn't even make any sense. It's unlikely Harmonix coded much (if anything) having to do with these songs while they were still with RedOctane. The rights were likely acquired at a very preliminary stage in creating a new game.



I highly doubt the terms of the song licenses go something like "use them in whatever games you want and however many you want, even if you become two independently operating entities" In other words, the songs are probably licensed individually for different, specific games.

The most likely theory is still that the labels/artists/whoever simply just want to license one particular track to whoever comes asking.

[cmg4894]

Let's go for a more plausible theory. They (HMX and RedOctane/Activision) probably jointly acquired the rights to the songs when they were just beginning to think about GHIII or another new game a long time ago. The point about coding doesn't even make any sense. It's unlikely Harmonix coded much (if anything) having to do with these songs while they were still with RedOctane. The rights were likely acquired at a very preliminary stage in creating a new game.



This part is just plain inaccurate. Developers can't develop a game for an existing intellectual property franchise based on "wanting to." Otherwise we might have another Amplitude game to play. :p Harmonix does not own the IP for Guitar Hero. It's that simple. Activision owns the Guitar Hero IP. It's Activision's call on who develops the games. When Harmonix got bought by MTV, their cost for external development went up with it. Activision chose (note that Harmonix had no say in this) to have a cheaper, internal developer (Neversoft) work on the next game. It is definitely within the realm of possibility that Harmonix could be developing both Guitar Hero III and Rock Band had Activision not chosen otherwise.

I don't agree with you. Think about it. HMX could have said no to GHIII. I understand Activision owns the rights to the game. But, if HMX refused maybe they had to go else where. Have you turned down something you didn't want to do, even if you were getting paid? I have. Why would HMX create both if the split didn't happen? They would not only be competing against themselves, but their resources would be split. I don't know how big HMX is but it doesn't sound like they have hundreds of people. If they did both, both games would suck and they knew that.

As for the 'rights' issue we basically said the same thing. About either both having the rights or whatever and after the split they both decided to use those same songs.

[psyborg]

Theres alot of valid theories here, I'm thinking the lables only giving out certain songs per band may be it but I also don't think the "RO stealing then HMX getting revenge" notion should be thrown completely out either.

[psyborg]

Guy get your facts straight. Neversoft didn't steal anything, like wise for HXM. The songs were lisenced probably around the same time and the just decided to release them at each owns time. This isn't high school or something, being immature "stealing" are you serious? The bands probably gave the two companies the same song because for what ever reason unknown to us the general public.

Why don't you read the very first post in this thread for vaild reasons why it could have happend.

Think before you post.


Why are going to attack someone for posting a simple theory? Because it differs from yours?

[Magnet]

I don't agree with you. Think about it. HMX could have said no to GHIII. I understand Activision owns the rights to the game. But, if HMX refused maybe they had to go else where. Have you turned down something you didn't want to do, even if you were getting paid? I have. Why would HMX create both if the split didn't happen? They would not only be competing against themselves, but their resources would be split. I don't know how big HMX is but it doesn't sound like they have hundreds of people. If they did both, both games would suck and they knew that.

I don't understand your question about "Why would HMX create both if the split didn't happen?" If it didn't happen, then RedOctane would get to make more peripherals for both games and RedOctane's profits would go soaring through the roof. There'd be no reason to look elsewhere if Harmonix wasn't bought out. The games would probably be released farther apart due to development time, but RedOctane would be rolling in the dough from both games. They wouldn't be competing against themselves since both games would result from the same partnership. Competing generally requires different companies making different games - not the same companies making different games. They wouldn't be fighting for profits between the games, they'd just generate a ton of more revenue for their companies from both. Anyway...

Harmonix could have said no to Guitar Hero III, but that wouldn't make a ton of sense. On a franchise that successful, it would be rather stupid to decline the offer. After what they did in Guitar Hero II, realistically all they needed for Guitar Hero III were new songs (and maybe a new peripheral which RedOctane would be responsible for anyway). They already had the engine running perfectly fine, and they wouldn't need to devote nearly as much time to it as with the previous two games. You make it sound like they'd have to create both games from scratch, but they've been working on Rock Band for quite a long time and the engine for Guitar Hero is just about as good as they can get it already. It's not unreasonable from a developing standpoint that they could do both - maybe the release dates would be a little later as a result, but that'd be the only thing to really suffer. I can't think of any company saying no to an offer for the money making machine that the Guitar Hero name has become. Companies are out to make money first and foremost, and moral qualms about games suffering slightly will usually take a backseat to millions and millions of dollars (especially when the money is on auto-pilot for a franchise like Guitar Hero).

After the split, they would essentially be competing against themselves. This is why Activision likely never offered Guitar Hero III to Harmonix, since they knew that they would become de facto competitors with another franchise. Let's just face the obvious, Activision recognized that once MTV owned Harmonix they were largely off-limits unless Activision wanted to pay through the roof and maybe end up with a less than stellar Guitar Hero installment. Activision looked internally at developers and decided that the best financial option was to go in-house with Neversoft (whose employees wanted to make a Guitar Hero game anyway).

Is there a chance that HMX would turn down an offer to GHIII? I suppose, but I honestly don't think Harmonix even had the chance to turn an offer down. I doubt there was an offer in the first place.

[Magnet]

I highly doubt the terms of the song licenses go something like "use them in whatever games you want and however many you want, even if you become two independently operating entities" In other words, the songs are probably licensed individually for different, specific games.

The most likely theory is still that the labels/artists/whoever simply just want to license one particular track to whoever comes asking.

It's very possible that the song licensing was intended for Rock Band (especially considering that most of the artists whose duplicates were announced have substantially better guitar-centric songs). Also possible is that when Harmonix left, they took Rock Band with them and the secured licensing for the game as well. However, maybe RedOctane recognized that the songs were easy to obtain licensing for and chose to license those for GHIII as well.

I realize you don't license a song for "two vague new games," I was referring to specifically either Guitar Hero III or Rock Band when I meant jointly. One likely took the songs already licensed to their game while the other company took advantage of the fact that the songs were easy to be licensed.

I don't think it has to do with artists only wanting to license one track. We're already seeing a bunch of different songs by the same artists in Rock Band and Guitar Hero IIII (for example, Blue Öyster Cult, Queens of the Stone Age, Metallica, The Rolling Stones, and Weezer). I think it has to do with licensing done at a very preliminary stage for one of the games.

[cmg4894]

Magnet:

First, I do like this civil debate. I have respect for you for not just saying "because I said so".

I think they would be competing against themselves because out side of a few 100 die hard fans, do people know who HMX is? I think most people would see two guitar style games and think they are two different companies. Unless they expanded their staff, the quality for both games would go down due to the lack of people. RedOctane wouldn't make all that much money. If HMX developed both games, then they would probably use the same guitars.

Just some thoughts, I need to run now so I can't go into more detail. Maybe later.