The Beatles: ROCK BAND - Rumors and Facts

[travmeatwad]

So, who's excited for E3? Haha.

[mva5580]

And that's fine, I mean I get that line of reasoning, I guess I just don't understand why it would still overly effect whether you buy the game or not.

I mean, if you really want to play the songs, why wouldn't you buy it regardless of whether or not you can import? Is that feature more important to you than experience the songs themselves? Or everything that this game is going to include? I mean people buy Halo 1, Halo 2, Halo 3, etc, and none of those games "import" into each other, but they're all very similar experiences wrapped around different features/new graphics/whatever. Why is this any different? It's going to be a unique game, about a unique group (a VERY unique group, the best of all time,) and everything else that goes along with that.

I understand what you're trying to say, and I guess all I can really bring to it is considering my personal feelings on how much I totally love The Beatles, I couldn't care less if it imports or not, I'm buying it. And I would really have to think that if you're someone that truly likes these songs, and are intrigued by what the game has to offer, you would buy it whether it imports or not. (I do own RB2, by the way) And honestly I think a lot of people who are wavering now will end up buying it after they see the game unveiled, because that's just how gamers are. But I guess we'll see what happens.

Oh and btw my prediction is they won't import into RB2, but will for RB3. Dhani has already said he's staying on to work on RB3, I bet this is kind of it's own "exclusive" game on its own until RB3, and then they'll import into that. So eventually I think it will happen, not just initially.

[Runesmith]

Thanks to that E3 schedule linked a page or two back, I'm actually more excited about Star Wars: The Old Republic than The Beatles game.

Forgive me, HMX.

[craven_trio]

And that's fine, I mean I get that line of reasoning, I guess I just don't understand why it would still overly effect whether you buy the game or not.

I mean, if you really want to play the songs, why wouldn't you buy it regardless of whether or not you can import? Is that feature more important to you than experience the songs themselves? Or everything that this game is going to include? I mean people buy Halo 1, Halo 2, Halo 3, etc, and none of those games "import" into each other, but they're all very similar experiences wrapped around different features/new graphics/whatever. Why is this any different? It's going to be a unique game, about a unique group (a VERY unique group, the best of all time,) and everything else that goes along with that.

I understand what you're trying to say, and I guess all I can really bring to it is considering my personal feelings on how much I totally love The Beatles, I couldn't care less if it imports or not, I'm buying it. And I would really have to think that if you're someone that truly likes these songs, and are intrigued by what the game has to offer, you would buy it whether it imports or not. (I do own RB2, by the way) And honestly I think a lot of people who are wavering now will end up buying it after they see the game unveiled, because that's just how gamers are. But I guess we'll see what happens.

Oh and btw my prediction is they won't import into RB2, but will for RB3. Dhani has already said he's staying on to work on RB3, I bet this is kind of it's own "exclusive" game on its own until RB3, and then they'll import into that. So eventually I think it will happen, not just initially.

I could see that a lot of people would only be interested in The Beatles for a rental to play through the songs a few times, but if it came with a one use export code they would want to buy it new.

It definitely does matter to me in some cases. I wouldn't have gone near AC/DC for example if that was only playable as a standalone game. AC/DC are stupid for hating downloads (shhh nobody tell them that the export code you get when you buy the disc... really downloads the tracks!). Or if the other Track Packs weren't avaialble separately as DLC or exportable, I would probably have rented them and played through them a couple of times. The Beatles seems different enough that I'll buy it regardless but I can see how a lot of people would feel otherwise.

[Lizard_King]

wow, june 1! thats sooo close. that weeks gonna be a good one. rock band: beatles, rb2 dlc, apple announcements, gh5. gettin my popcorn ready haha

[mva5580]

I could see that a lot of people would only be interested in The Beatles for a rental to play through the songs a few times, but if it came with a one use export code they would want to buy it new.

It definitely does matter to me in some cases. I wouldn't have gone near AC/DC for example if that was only playable as a standalone game. AC/DC are stupid for hating downloads (shhh nobody tell them that the export code you get when you buy the disc... really downloads the tracks!). Or if the other Track Packs weren't avaialble separately as DLC or exportable, I would probably have rented them and played through them a couple of times. The Beatles seems different enough that I'll buy it regardless but I can see how a lot of people would feel otherwise.

It just seems like a round-a-bout way of saying "I like it, but I don't like it that much." And if that's true, why does the exporting even matter? I mean if I'm going to spend $60 on something, it's going to need to have content that I'm going to play consistently. And the content that is included with this disc doesn't change depending on whether or not it can be imported. If anything, you're losing content by just spending $60, importing it into RB2, and never playing The Beatles disc ever again. You lose seeing all their venues, all their videos, etc, everything that goes along with that.

Your AC/DC example. I didn't buy that, wouldn't buy it either way because AC/DC just doesn't do much for me. But if AC/DC did do something for me, if I liked their music enough to want to play it, I'd buy the disc whether the songs were exportable or not. I didn't buy Metallica or Aerosmith for the same reason, I just wouldn't play the music enough to spend $60. Or $30, or whatever.

I just can't get past the fundamental question of if you like the music/band, why wouldn't you buy it? Export or not, you're still going to be able to enjoy the music. Anyway it's just a fundamental disagreement and that's the way it goes. I don't want to get into it too much because I'm just so thrilled this game is coming out, I'd pay whatever they ask me. So I guess that just skews my opinion. I already have the full bundle paid off, and halfway through both of the stand alone guitars. And I'm buying the remastered CD's on the same day. But that still doesn't mean I'd have a different opinion about other bands. If you like the music, I don't see why exporting matters. And I think The Beatles certainly qualify as a situation where they could keep it as it's own game for a while and still sell plenty. And like I said I think they will export into Rock Band 3.

[craven_trio]

It just seems like a round-a-bout way of saying "I like it, but I don't like it that much."
...
Your AC/DC example. I didn't buy that, wouldn't buy it either way because AC/DC just doesn't do much for me. But if AC/DC did do something for me, if I liked their music enough to want to play it, I'd buy the disc whether the songs were exportable or not.

Bingo. I like to listen to AC/DC sometimes. I like to play the occasional AC/DC song in RB2, worth the price I paid I think. But I don't usually feel like playing enough AC/DC songs in a row to justify going out of my RB2 session, swapping discs, starting an AC/DC session, playing the songs I want, leaving that session, swapping discs, starting another RB2 session. Someone who likes The Beatles about as much as I like AC/DC, I could imagine they'd feel like I do that it's not worth keeping and playing regularly if there's no export.

The Beatles is a bit different from just a Track Pack because it's a whole new experience (or so the PR would have us believe!), so I'd say worth buying and playing standalone anyway. I do want to play the standalone game and experience all the extra stuff as well as just the songs.

But when I've done that for a while, I'd prefer to be able to mix those songs in with my RB2 songs in either or both of those games. Pop in RB2, but have Hey Jude in the middle of a setlist. Pop in The Beatles, and play all my old favourites with Beatles stylings.

Or imagine a completely integrated UI so I can have a choice of which sort Tour to play in (Beatles, RB2, others?) and throw some Beatles scenarios mixed in with Quickplay (whether The Beatles venues/characters only appear with their own songs or not is a design/licensing decision I guess). This will never, ever happen (I said that about things like RB1 export and even cross compatible DLC before so fingers crossed).

[DMBillies]

It just seems like a round-a-bout way of saying "I like it, but I don't like it that much."

Yes it is.

I just had my computer count for me and I have 74 different Beatles songs on my HDD. Do I like the Beatles? Yes. Do I like the Beatles a lot? Probably more than the average bear. Do I like RB? I have over 500 songs for the game and spend at least 5-10 hours per week playing even on my busiest weeks, so yes, I'd say that.

So, all of that said, why isn't the Beatles an insta-buy?

First, I already have and own a LOT of their music and I can almost guarantee that I own 95% of what is going to be on this disk. Second, I have listened to the Beatles a lot. I won't say I'm burned out on them, but I think that playing through some of them 1 or 2 times will be plenty. Third, with 500 songs in my RB catalogue I don't see any of the songs being so earth shatteringly better than what I've already got that I couldn't live without playing them. Fourth, 60 bucks is a lot (more if I want tricked out instruments) and unlike RB1 and RB2, which have sustained me for 5-10 hours per week since RB1 release, I just don't see The Beatles game lasting me more than a month as a stand alone title.

Without export, the value of the music in the game is less than what it would otherwise be (to me)... and that makes $60 a hard pill to swallow. At this point, the number one reason I don't care what GH releases is because of this issue and I would really hate to see HMX go down the same road... no matter what band they get by doing it. The only way I will change my mind is if there is something about TB:RB that is so revolutionary as to make the songs naturally incompatible with future versions of the main RB platform... and I just don't think that will
be the case.

My own (perhaps too cheery) prediction is that they will be announcing RB3 for 3-4 months into next year at E3 and make an official statement about exportability of the Beatles game as it nears release (to help bolster sales in the face of GH5).

I'm steadfast on this. I don't support standalone band games because of replay value issues, it is not what I'm looking for from HMX, and I will not buy this game without export... I know this is a played out argument... and I know some people are sick of it... but I think HMX is just starting to really differentiate themselves from GH through their platform approach and I think it would be a major step back to not continue that differentiation.

[FrogKid28]

http://www.thebeatlesrockband.com/
The instruments have been set up.... It's all of the instruments announced as models for the controllers, and there are two microphones!!!!

HARMONIESSSSSSSS

[whofan]

http://www.thebeatlesrockband.com/
The instruments have been set up.... It's all of the instruments announced as models for the controllers, and there are two microphones!!!!

HARMONIESSSSSSSS

It's an in-game re-creation of the Ed Sullivan stage (I think, I can't see it right now, but unless they've changed it again), The Beatles always performed with at least 2 mics.

I wouldn't get my hopes up just yet. It doesn't mean anything.