Double the volume of Guitar Hero expected in 2009

by Randy Nelson { Sep 17th 2008 at 12:29AM }

If you thought that 2008's triple-billing of Guitar Hero: Aerosmith, Guitar Hero: On Tour and the upcoming Guitar Hero World Tour was, well, a lot of Guitar Hero ... you ain't seen nuthin' yet. Activision-Blizzard revealed at an event for industry analysts that it intends to double the number of Guitar Hero SKUs (not necessarily unique games, just console-specific variations of "core" titles) in 2009. The goal is to triple them in 2010. Whammy bar!

Considering that we had two console Guitar Hero titles this year, that would potentially mean four in 2009 (one being Guitar Hero: Metallica) and six in 2010. That's not even counting handhelds. So ... are you ready to rock, a lot? Or is this all just way too much noise? Let us know in comments.

Tags: activision, activision-blizzard, guitar-hero, guitar-hero-aerosmith, guitar-hero-metallica, guitar-hero-on-tour, guitar-hero-world-tour

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)

Surly Yerby @ Sep 17th 2008 12:34AM

Guitar Hero died when Harmonix stopped making it.

TheE3Guy @ Sep 17th 2008 12:36AM

Nonsense, GH3 was awesome, GH World Tour looks amazing compared to Rock Band 2. I just hope the series' future doesn't go the way of Tony Hawk...

Surly Yerby @ Sep 17th 2008 12:47AM

If you beleive GHIII was great and that World Tour looks good compared to Rock Band 2 -- well go ahead and buy six guitar hero games next year. I mean, seriously, the track list on World Tour? Total crap.

Neversoft has no idea how to make a good music game, and Activision will undoubtedly milk this into the effing ground. Enjoy!

BeeDizz @ Sep 17th 2008 2:21AM

I have too agree with Surly Yerby there. Activision will saturate the market, not allow DLC to be forward compatible, (something that has caused me to not download a single piece of DLC for GHIII short of Death Magnetic), and kill the franchise.

lego91994 @ Sep 17th 2008 8:26AM

Why is Surly Yerby getting voted down? GH:WT does look good, and so does RB:2.

Most people who buy these types of games are the people who don't go to these types of sites anyways, and they might prefer getting disc based games rather than DLC.

I dont see how releasing these games is really a bad thing. If you don't want them, don't buy them.

And why can't 2 different series coexist? It's not like you only have 1 FPS or racing game, and with instrument compatibility it doesn't even really matter.

Slaziman @ Sep 17th 2008 8:55AM

Guitar Hero hate is so annoying.

At least GH:WT has a fucking release date in the EU, whereas Harmonix has been screwing Europeans since Rock Band and now Rock Band 2 doesn't even have a release date.

Also, the Rock Band guitar is shit. Just throwing it out there. The game is fun but who knows if GH:WT won't pull the same thing off?

The only things I've got against Guitar Hero are the costumer un-friendly practices in comparison with Rock Band (all the DLC crap) and the fact that the track list is supposedly shit (haven't confirmed, but heard from a lot of people). Otherwise I don't see what's wrong with it.

JJ Rooster @ Sep 17th 2008 11:37AM

Slaziman, the GHWT setlist link is below. There are 14 common songs with RB2 which is just stupid. They need to have weekly DLC and no mandatory packs if they want me to buy it.

JJ Rooster @ Sep 17th 2008 11:46AM

The link is
http://community.guitarhero.com/forums/55708/forum_topics/120733

Slaziman @ Sep 17th 2008 1:25PM

Thanks, I don't listen much music so I don't know a lot of these songs, but the ones I recognized weren't so bad.

Vega @ Sep 17th 2008 12:35AM

Way too much. What are they trying to do--run this into the ground?

Aren't they satisfied with having done that to the Tony Hawk series?

Foetoid @ Sep 17th 2008 1:43AM

I don't understand all the Tony Hawk hate. They tried to do something new with Downhill Jam (my most played Wii game, had it since launch, SO UNDERRATED) and they got grilled.

Surly Yerby @ Sep 17th 2008 1:47AM

Tony Hawk kinda of fell to the "Madden" syndrome of at least one new game every year, and turns out that there just werent enough people interested enough in that to buy it year in year out.

Any new Tony Hawk release now just looks kinda sad after the wake of crappy update after crappy update from the past.

Beatz @ Sep 17th 2008 12:36AM

Yep. You hear that screaming sound? That's the cash cow, whose nipples are about to fall right off.

Activision, you're going to kill the genre. It's called oversaturation.

MrSpaceCowboy @ Sep 17th 2008 12:37AM

I'm sure Guitar Hero's nipples hurt from all that milking.

JerJer @ Sep 17th 2008 1:36AM

activision is starting to smell a lot like hickory-smoked horse buttholes....in a cup.

Foetoid @ Sep 17th 2008 1:48AM

I....LOVE MOTHER!

ZENegade @ Sep 17th 2008 1:59AM

Oh shit, it's... Dr. Tran!

And yeah: been saying since GH III that Activision has bastardized the franchise. And by god, they have. I think the multiple games are their answer to Rock Band's phenomenal DLC. You stay classy, Activision.

Oh wait. I friggin' hate you and am boycotting your games. Sorry.

Nirolak @ Sep 17th 2008 12:42AM

Pfft, they're never going to grind the series into the ground at this rate.

Come on Activision, I demand 25 Guitar Hero games next year!

joseph young @ Sep 17th 2008 12:43AM

I'm surprise that people say EA is milking it's franchises when you see this type of behavior from Activision/Blizzard. How much guitar hero can I play? Not 3 titles a year.

zuburi @ Sep 17th 2008 12:53AM

Isn't it possible that both companies are doing it?

joseph young @ Sep 17th 2008 1:26AM

@zuburi, I agree that both may be doing it. The question is doing it worse. I see EA creating new IP and partnering with studios to create a more diverse portfolio. I'm not saying that either is a saint.

mietha CAG @ Sep 17th 2008 12:43AM

Does it really matter. 2, 4, 6 shitty games a year? It's all the same. I'll stick with my Rock Band weekly updates and yearly (hopefully) overhauls and am abandoning the GH franchise. I'm not buying another GH game until the stupid fucking battles are removed from career play. GH3 was eh, aerosmith was shit, on tour was basically unplayable and WT looks like complete shit compared to rock band. Sure it has a few good exclusive songs (throwing around huge stacks of cash will get you that), but nothing stands out and 5 songs aren't worth a purchase, not to mention the fucking battles ARE STILL THERE. I'll be buying the not-les paul... to play rock band 2 with.

Surly Yerby @ Sep 17th 2008 12:48AM

Who is running Activision now, anyway? Dr. Evil?

ONE MILLLLLLEON SKUS!!!

LordChimp @ Sep 17th 2008 9:14AM

I hated those guitar battles as well. I think they were absolutely retarded. Another reason why I will be sticking with RB2.

Sesur @ Sep 17th 2008 12:56AM

That's right guys... milk it Nintendo style!

WRE @ Sep 17th 2008 2:04AM

That's right Sesur...milk those Nintendo "jokes" for all they're worth. Meanwhile, Sony just released the eighth Ratchet game since 2002 and Microsoft will release a new Halo or a new Gears of War game every Christmas until forever. The upside? They're all enjoyable games. So, you have a choice. You could figure out that everyone does it and it's not a problem as long as the quality doesn't go down, or you could claim that only Nintendo does it and look like an ignorant moron.

ScallionN @ Sep 17th 2008 2:48AM

It's just that when Nintendo does it, they churn out more crap than quality titles. It's a sad fall from grace, but it's the truth.
Or do you actually enjoy Mario Party XIII?

tmacairjordan87 @ Sep 17th 2008 7:04AM

As much as I hate to defend halo, there's only been like 3 games in 7 years and only 2 Gears in about 2 years. Unless you want to count spinoffs for halo, like halo wars, in which case I could bring up like 1000 different Mario spinoffs.

Sesur @ Sep 17th 2008 9:42PM

@WRE

No shit Nintendo isn't the only offender... you assuming I ever said that makes you look like a presumptuous moron.

PS
Big N is doing just fine without you; no need to jump on every comment that passively denigrates them.

Monkeys Suck @ Sep 17th 2008 1:06AM

This is waaay too much. I'm a Guitar Hero person moreso than Rock Band (I'm more of a classic rock guy), but this will overplay the series. Although, if you think about it, with the new content released by Harmonix, in the time between guitar hero games, it might just add up to be equivalent.

CubeGuy @ Sep 17th 2008 1:11AM

I'll take my Rock Band Weekly instead, thank you.

lorddshadow @ Sep 17th 2008 1:11AM

why not leave it at world tour and significantally update it every two years to keep things fresh and competitive? oh wait...it's activision.

r.i.p. tony hawk. we miss you.

Tiptup300 @ Sep 17th 2008 3:23AM

I don't miss you, he does, I don't.

Savage @ Sep 17th 2008 1:22AM

That's just, well insane. From the looks of it they aren't going to be focused on the DLC side of things as much as Harmonix. I really don't see the point in releasing a band specific game (i.e. Aerosmith or Metallica). I'd rather just download a few of their classic songs than pay $60 for a full game based around them.

Six games in 2010 is ridiculous. That's $240 for Guitar Hero alone. By then Harmonix could have 1500 songs available. I think I'll stick to Rock Band.

Jack Spicer @ Sep 17th 2008 1:54AM

this game sucks balls. Whoever keeps buying it should shoot themself in the face with a potatoe gun, srsly, this is a sorry excuse for a game now. Good job Guitar Hero, PETA will applaude you for giving monkeys the right to work.

CowDawg08 @ Sep 17th 2008 2:10AM

so basically GH big wigs have realized that their wallets get fatter from full games rather than songs to download...soooo they're going to release full games with new tracks rather than do any new features and sit back and wait for the money to print itself. Ideally good, but unless there are amazing tracks on every game and updated features, its just a money ploy.

Iceman346 @ Sep 17th 2008 2:12AM

While I don't buy into the Guitar Hero hate going around aplenty (imo GH3 was a good game and had the better track list than Rock Band 1 at release) I just like the Rock Band model a lot more.
If MTV/Harmonix go on providing "song packs" in the form of new games with the ability to carry over your old music then I'm completely sold. Thats the way a music game should work. I just don't want to search through 5 discs to find the song I want to play.

On the other hand, as a european I feel neglected if not ignored by EAs release policy regarding Rock Band. As a 360 owner I had to wait half a year for RB1 and the PS3 version is coming out this or next week. And with the second title it looks like there will be similar gaps.
And thats something that Activision just did better so far, all their games were release at similar times all over the world. So if RB2 takes another half year I will probably buy World Tour, too. If they were close together I would only buy Rock Band 2.

zombiejesus @ Sep 17th 2008 2:27AM

MILK! MILK! MILK! MILK!

SHAZAM! @ Sep 17th 2008 4:15AM

What a complete and utter waste... Rock Band has the right idea with regular DLC, everyone knows that, except Activision it seems who are still stuck releasing disc based games.

I'm not saying never do more games, like where Rock Band 2 has just enough to make it a worthwhile purchase, but when you're just churning them out like this it's not going to end in anything worthwhile.

Vcize @ Sep 17th 2008 10:39AM

"like where Rock Band 2 has just enough to make it a worthwhile purchase"

RB2 is basically a $60 update to RB1 that let's you play world tour mode online.

I would have much rather just had a downloadable update to RB1 that did this, and all the music on RB2 just be DLC, especially given Harmonix's "we're making RB1 a platform and we're not just going to churn out sequels" statement a while back.

It amazes me how they get such an enormous pass for RB2 in an era of people getting pissed off when sequels don't evolve enough from one iteration to another.

I guess they've just built up enough good will from their awesome DLC strategy, but it should still be mentioned and noted. I mean, Madden 08 to Madden 09 is a bigger leap than RB1 to RB2 and people whine about the Madden change incessantly.

JJ Rooster @ Sep 17th 2008 11:45AM

Vcize, your comments are stupid they don't deserve this response.

You'd rather see the 85 songs on disc and 20 free tracks released as DLC so you can pay $2 each for them? Any fool can see the disc is a bargain, not even adding the improved gameplay and new features.

How is Rock Band not a platform? Does the new DLC not work with RB1?

ya burnt, dumbass!

Vcize @ Sep 17th 2008 2:25PM

"You'd rather see the 85 songs on disc and 20 free tracks released as DLC so you can pay $2 each for them?"

That would imply that I, or the average user, was interested in buying all 85 tracks. I, and I would imagine the average user, is interested in paying for nowhere near that many of the 85 released tracks. Options, my man, options.

Bottom line is they said they weren't going to start churning out annual sequels, and not only did they do exactly that, but they did it with a sequel that is more similar to its predecessor than any game in history.

But, why am I bothering to respond. Clearly, "I burnt" anyway.

And, I suppose I don't need to point out the irony in your first sentence...

SHAZAM! @ Sep 18th 2008 4:01AM

Vcize, to reply to your first point, I am going to assume that the code needed to implement the stuff that they have (Online World Tour, changes to the way your characters can play world tour, Drum Trainer) would have been fairly large, too big for a patch. I am sure Microsoft has some limit on patch sizes, and this may have made RB2 updates only suitable for a disc release. I am sure at some point they thought about simply patching the game.

However, the songs are a fantastic deal in that game. Getting them for the price you do is cool, especially when it's a pretty good set list too. I stand by my argument that HMX have done just enough to get a pass on releasing this sequel, especially if you look at the changes present in GH: Aerosmith over GH3.

RangerPrimeX @ Sep 17th 2008 5:08AM

Pass. I will stick with Rock Band.

Psycho300x @ Sep 17th 2008 6:09AM

leave it to activision, flooding the market with crappy music games is just going to kill the genre, guess they want to ride that gravy train into the ground...

Amirisme @ Sep 17th 2008 6:57AM

OMG... theres just so much hate here.... what are you people? The association of people who have too much time so they get angry at everything?

I say, LET them bring out 4 6 guitar heros every year if they want to. you dont wanna play it? then just let it be. And this coming from someone who has both guitar hero and rock band mind u

Zeromaru @ Sep 17th 2008 7:00AM

I don't quite get the Nintendo hate for milking... though the argument certainly exists for Mario Party, it doesn't as much for any other series. The core Mario series has only had 6.5 entries in 23 years (SMB2 was just enhanced from SMB1 counting the .5, and not counting SMB2 USA (just a hack by the American offices), and SMW2 (that introduced Yoshi's own series)). I guess if you consider re-releases, then they have a habit of doing that, but the marketing strategy there is to introduce their older games to new audiences, showing they stand the test of time.

Also, to whoever mentioned Downhill Jam: DJ was the *exception* to the rule, and more particular the DS version was the exception (along with American Sk8land). Proving Ground moved the franchise back into new-game-every-year-every-platform milking.

But it is quite ironic that Activision is becoming the new EA in terms of yearly releases, while EA itself is moving away from that trend.