Activision Blizzard CEO questions rhythm game royalties yet again

Well the same can be said about any other type of media.(Movies, TV...)

I'm pretty sure no one ever listened to The Moldy Peaches before Juno.

However with Rhythm games the music is its main draw.

Good. Stick it the record companies. Guitar Hero and Rock Band do more for the music industry than anything else I can think of off the top of my head, so if certain companies in music industry want to try and ream Activision and Harmonix, let them cry when their music doesn;t get in the games.

Why can't they agree that they both benefit from crossing the media, and get rid of royalties altogether? The game companies should show whatever the statistic is on singles purchased through digital stores comparing songs on these games to songs on the same albums that were not in these games: 'look, music industry, music you share with us get YOU more money from customers. Why are we paying you to advertise your products?'

I know for certain that Rock Band is responsible for me buying full albums by artists that I normally wouldn't have heard of due to local radio stations only playing the same 10 rock artists on endless repeat.

To play devil's advocate: if Guitar Hero or Rock Band did NOT have all the licensed music, would anyone buy them? I agree that the music industry makes out with the free publicity, and shouldn't pout too much about it, but they'd still have a product with or without rhythm games. Without the licensed music, rhythm games would not be making any money at all.

"Bawwwwwwww!!! We're not making enough money of others peoples creations! HOW CAN I AFFORD MY JET AND 20 ASIAN HOOKERS?!"

Did I sum that up about right?

Oh yes Kotick please try that. You will see how far you can go in a music game when you piss off the main source of your games, the music labels.

you can either pay for the rights to music people want or use your own and public domain like wii music and see how much dough rolls in for almost redundant instruments and pop goes the weasel.

I'd be suprised if people weren't already paying to have their music on GH/RB.

After all, there was that free-to-download song to promote some movie on Rock band, and I remember a news story a while back that GH3 was confirmed to have a song of QOTSA's (then) unreleased album.

I can't imagine Neversoft sat there thinking "you know what we really need? A song off QOTSA's new album that we've not even heard yet! Because that's definitely a 'Legend of Rock'"

Hey John, look! I'm trolling another Rock Band/Guitar Hero post!

*Dr. Evil Pose*

One might think that the music industry should welcome another venue through which to sell their product and expand fan bases.

I might, if I were head of a music company, worry about some rather ingenious game programmer figuring out how to generate quality rhythm games generated from their own music libraries, thereby cutting out the music labels entirely.

Oh wait, that's already happening on a limited scale isn't it? Is it perfect, no, but it sure as hell is possible.

By playing nice and maintaining quality relationships with game creators, it seems far more plausible to keep rhythm games as a revenue source rather than losing more access to the genre.

"we'll leave that to you, our well-informed and judicious readers."

WTF!? Have you been reading the comments on this site? Honestly?


(yes I'm aware of sarcasm, thank you)

Translation: I want a second gold plated BMW.

I can see where Kotick is coming from...

Basically, he looks at RB/GH series as commercials for the artists and alst I checked, the artists and such had to pay to have their commercials aired, not the otherway around.

I'd never even heard of some of the bands on half of the set lists, and most of the bonus tracks, now I have and I've bought a few of those CD's because of it.

Of course, that's just in my case. We all know that both sides are greedy for more of our cash.

I see the logic behind his idea, but he stated it in the most arrogant way possible

The whole reason people will buy one of their stinking products in the first place is that people like the music - before the sale actually takes place it is the music carrying the game. If a Guitar Hero game had a crappy tracklist, its sales, and the sales of the franchise, would be negatively affected. His argument that Guitar Hero should be viewed merely as an advertisement platform betrays his complete lack of respect for the franchise. Hey moron, people can still choose not to buy your crappy products, a choice I already plan on exercising (in favour of Harmonix, natch). As long as that's the case, YOU need the music to push your cash cow out the door, not the other way around.

Guitar Hero works because it's not full of unsigned bands paying for exposure, it's full of rock legends and contemporary music people recognise on the bullet points of the box and want to play. You need them more than they need you. If you think artists should be paying you to be included in your club, maybe you should stop going to them, and seeking exclusive contracts with huge artists to compete with Rock Band, you hypocrite. Maybe they should come to you, seeing they apparently need you so bad.

Come on, not paying royalties for music is just ridiculous. It's just like in television and movies: it's about attracting consumers (in TV and movies it sets the tone, so it's indirect but still the same concept). I could understand saying that some unknown bands who would benefit from the exposure being coaxed to pay to be put in the game, or if a marketing exec wants to build anticipation for a new album they might be willing to pay, but as a whole that's ridiculous. How many people haven't heard of AC/DC, Aerosmith, or the Rolling Stones and are playing these games?

Besides the fact that it makes little sense for most artists to pay to be in a game, I also think it'd be a dangerous precedent. Dangerous as in a lot of shitty music could end up in the games just because a record label layed down a ton of money for it. Who wants that to become the norm? All I know is whoever holds the right to Led Zeppelin would not lay down a cent to be put in the game, so the little glimmer of hope left that my favorite band will show up will disappear entirely if bands have to start "paying to be played."

A lot of people are making good points on this comment board. Kotick's comments are completely ridiculous. The industry is dying, and giving up all the money involved with rhythm games is a shot in the foot. Them paying you, Bobby, are you crazy!

I'm not giving you my art, or the art I helped produce, for free. This is my job. It is how I earn my living.

How can Bobby be so arrogant and feel like he can get away with these comments? Because Activision Blizzard is owned by Vivendi who owns the Universal Media Group who own EVERYTHING! Even if they refuse to promote 90% of their property, UMG owns enough music, especially more recent Pop hits, that the average consumer would never realize what little amount of WMG, SonyBMG or EMI music ends up in future Guitar Hero instalments and DLC, granted Kotick keeps pissing people off and/or takes the easier route of just licensing music that will never get refused.

Two words: PRODUCT PLACEMENT.

In media, be it movies or TV, companies shell out advertising dollars to get a few seconds worth of air time. In very rare cases do movie or TV show producers have to pay companies to use their products.

I see no reason why another media format (videogames) should be different.

I always thought it was ridiculous that racing games had to pay Ford or Porsche to use their cars too.

Aww heck, come to think of it, about 99% of copyright, patent and licensing is complete and utter crap.

They are both right! And there is a simple solution. The game publishers need to do their jobs and come up with the bridge instead of crying about the toll to use someone else's; because RB/GH/whatever wouldn't exist without licensed music whereas the latter does not need the former.

1. Game developers pay royalties for music in their games.
2. Game developers give gamers a way to purchase music they like or got turned on to from a game. Obviously, they'd need to create some kind of system for this but it would be akin to being asked "did anyone help you with this purchase today?" and the gamer responding "Yes. Activision, by way of Guitar Hero, hooked a brother up."
3. Music Industry pays game developers royalties for music that was purchased due to games.

This guy is obviously not a musician.

@Dan :: Obviously, you aren't either... Or you would know the bands aren't even seeing any of that at all... The band usually doesn't own the music.

And I agree... these games are driving album sales to a certain degree.