We imagine there will be very few of you on the fence, so we have to ask: When Guitar Hero: Metallica arrives early next year, will you be picking it up?
We imagine there will be very few of you on the fence, so we have to ask: When Guitar Hero: Metallica arrives early next year, will you be picking it up?
Reader Comments (95)
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 12:33PM (Unverified) said
Yes is it a dealbreaker for me. After buying, completing World Tour and then seeing the pitiful downloadable songs they are giving people I'm done with Guitar Hero. I just don't like how they keep releasing separate games when they could have built on a single platform where all these songs could have been downloaded under one umbrella.
Reply
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 12:49PM (Unverified) said
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbIGbZ6gq_Y
To paraphrase Louis C.K., it's amazing how quickly the world owes you something that you didn't even know existed when the first Rock Band was released a little over a year ago.
Reply
To paraphrase Louis C.K., it's amazing how quickly the world owes you something that you didn't even know existed when the first Rock Band was released a little over a year ago.
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 1:37PM TRTX said
The export feature is most definately a major difference when it comes to GH/RB. Even if it didn't exist until a few months ago.
The RB franchise currently only has ONE disc based release that is not avaliable as DLC (AC/DC). However, it is fully exportable to RB2...
But look at Activision's track record with GH.
GH:III was completely unable to play DLC from GH:II. GH:A, which was built on the same engine as GH:III was not able to play DLC from even GH:III.
But suddenly GHWT is able to play GH:III DLC?
And in such a short time after lauching a totally new branch of the franchise, they're going to do it all over again with Metallica. I will be genuinely surprised if GH:M will play GHWT DLC.
And like I've said before...there is so far no way to get these songs into GHWT. So once you're done with the Metallica disc, there's no way to build on it through DLC or to carry it back into the main part of the franchise.
Which means replayability is *pfft*.
And yes, for these types of games (Which are INCREDIBLY popular at parties) changing discs is a huge mood killer. I've been to enough RB parties to know there's no "plan" as to what songs people will want to play. They'll see the setlist and call out something just browsing through. They're not going to want to swap discs and see what's on that one...then get bored of it and want to swap back.
It may be a new innovation, but it's a HUGE advantage in RB's corner.
Reply
The RB franchise currently only has ONE disc based release that is not avaliable as DLC (AC/DC). However, it is fully exportable to RB2...
But look at Activision's track record with GH.
GH:III was completely unable to play DLC from GH:II. GH:A, which was built on the same engine as GH:III was not able to play DLC from even GH:III.
But suddenly GHWT is able to play GH:III DLC?
And in such a short time after lauching a totally new branch of the franchise, they're going to do it all over again with Metallica. I will be genuinely surprised if GH:M will play GHWT DLC.
And like I've said before...there is so far no way to get these songs into GHWT. So once you're done with the Metallica disc, there's no way to build on it through DLC or to carry it back into the main part of the franchise.
Which means replayability is *pfft*.
And yes, for these types of games (Which are INCREDIBLY popular at parties) changing discs is a huge mood killer. I've been to enough RB parties to know there's no "plan" as to what songs people will want to play. They'll see the setlist and call out something just browsing through. They're not going to want to swap discs and see what's on that one...then get bored of it and want to swap back.
It may be a new innovation, but it's a HUGE advantage in RB's corner.
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 2:05PM Johnnynumber5 is powered by cell said
Changing disc's is a dealbreaker for me because like Scott said it has to be played as a standalone version. If I want to do a 10 song set list in Rock Band 2 I have access to all the songs/trackpacks from within one game instead of having to play different standalone games.
Reply
Posted: Dec 17th 2008 2:53AM (Unverified) said
People seem to keep ignoring that the Beatles game won't even be Rock Band branded and you won't be able to copy the songs to play them in Rock Band, but I guess Harmonix is still cool as long as they only pull this crap off half of the time.
Reply
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 12:10PM (Unverified) said
So let me get this straight, as I'm not caught up on the latest version of hypocrisy of the week
Rock Band AC/DC and Beatles = Good.
Guitar Hero Aerosmith and Metallica = Bad.
Do I have it down fanboys?
Rock Band AC/DC and Beatles = Good.
Guitar Hero Aerosmith and Metallica = Bad.
Do I have it down fanboys?
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 12:19PM (Unverified) said
As long as they allow us to copy the Beatles songs to my hard drive I'll consider that "good" along with the AC/DC pack. And yes, Aerosmith and Metallica are both "bad" considering you can't copy them to play on a single platform.....in my opinion anyway.
Guitar Hero III should have expanded on their online store with all the songs from Aerosmith and then all the songs from World Tour released over time. Now when Metallica comes out they could have put all those songs on there as well. I could have been much more inclined to buy them all if it would have been playable under a single platform.
Reply
Guitar Hero III should have expanded on their online store with all the songs from Aerosmith and then all the songs from World Tour released over time. Now when Metallica comes out they could have put all those songs on there as well. I could have been much more inclined to buy them all if it would have been playable under a single platform.
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 12:24PM (Unverified) said
lol +1 Tmac
Can't Harmonix/Activision just put out a patch?
Reply
Can't Harmonix/Activision just put out a patch?
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 12:26PM (Unverified) said
Oops, see, thats my music game n00bness showing. :P I meant RedOctane/Activision on that patch.
Reply
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 12:29PM copa said
"Do I have it down fanboys?"
You're close.
Rock Band AC/DC: Stupid. But once Walmart knocks this thing down to $20, worth a purchase because you can export the songs into your Rock Band game.
GH Aersosmith: Bad.
GH Metallica: Bad. Could have helped themselves without putting such an emphasis on post-1980's Metallica. But bad.
Rock Band Beatles: Mother Fucking Unbelievably Awesome. You just don't know, dude. Giles Martin is mastering the sound for this shit. And of the bands mentioned so far, only the Beatles have a kick-ass and varied enough catalog that is worth building a 40+ song game around.
Reply
You're close.
Rock Band AC/DC: Stupid. But once Walmart knocks this thing down to $20, worth a purchase because you can export the songs into your Rock Band game.
GH Aersosmith: Bad.
GH Metallica: Bad. Could have helped themselves without putting such an emphasis on post-1980's Metallica. But bad.
Rock Band Beatles: Mother Fucking Unbelievably Awesome. You just don't know, dude. Giles Martin is mastering the sound for this shit. And of the bands mentioned so far, only the Beatles have a kick-ass and varied enough catalog that is worth building a 40+ song game around.
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 12:36PM (Unverified) said
tmacairjordan87, you know as well as anyone on here that Harmonix did not have a choice in the matter when it came to ACDC and The Beatles. They were prolly in a conference room and the bands simply said "Take it or leave it." What was Harmonix supposed to do? Say no to two huge bands because they don't want to put their stuff for download? While Gaytar hero continues to pump out games like crazy? They don't like the idea of one band games but they had to adapt if they wanted to compete with Activision.
And by the way, those are bands are so stubborn (and stupid imo) that they think their music is to good to be available for download. They both make good music but if the only option you have for me is to buy your ENTIRE album, then fuck off I can get your music with out paying.
For example, I listened to the new ACDC album on youtube. The only songs that I would actually purchase where Rock 'n' Roll Train and War Machine. But guess what? I can't because I'll be damned if I buy an album with 15 songs and only like 2 of them.
But that's why there are torrents.
Reply
And by the way, those are bands are so stubborn (and stupid imo) that they think their music is to good to be available for download. They both make good music but if the only option you have for me is to buy your ENTIRE album, then fuck off I can get your music with out paying.
For example, I listened to the new ACDC album on youtube. The only songs that I would actually purchase where Rock 'n' Roll Train and War Machine. But guess what? I can't because I'll be damned if I buy an album with 15 songs and only like 2 of them.
But that's why there are torrents.
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 2:48PM Vcize said
Granted, the ability to copy songs to your hard drive and play them all of one disk is very convenient, but I can't believe to some people that is the difference between "omg this is the worst thing ever Activision you jackasses" and "omg this is the most amazing thing ever I want to have all your babies Harmonix".
And this is coming from someone that desperately wants a feature on the consoles to install the games to the hard drive and be able to play them without the disk. But that's just a convenience thing, not the difference between the greatest thing ever and the worst thing ever.
And aren't the RB "track packs" a hell of a lot more expensive per song than the GH "full games"? GH:Aerosmith was $60 for almost 50 songs and isn't the AC/DC pack like $40 for 16 songs? Not to mention the price of these GH full game discs drop like a rock so it's easy to pick up 50 songs for around 15 bucks a couple months later, something that will never be possible with DLC.
Reply
And this is coming from someone that desperately wants a feature on the consoles to install the games to the hard drive and be able to play them without the disk. But that's just a convenience thing, not the difference between the greatest thing ever and the worst thing ever.
And aren't the RB "track packs" a hell of a lot more expensive per song than the GH "full games"? GH:Aerosmith was $60 for almost 50 songs and isn't the AC/DC pack like $40 for 16 songs? Not to mention the price of these GH full game discs drop like a rock so it's easy to pick up 50 songs for around 15 bucks a couple months later, something that will never be possible with DLC.
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 2:51PM Vcize said
Also, these two like to copy off of each other mercilessly, so I wouldn't be surprised if Red Octane did end up copying Harmonix's idea of allowing you to rip the songs to your hard drive and play them from there. There first chance to copy the idea was GH3 to GHWT, and that wouldn't really work because of all the instruments added in GHWT that GH3 didn't have, so this is their first chance to copy the idea without it requiring them to re-do all the songs they've already put out.
Reply
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 12:14PM Sweet Dude said
Bring on Guitar Hero U2!
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 12:14PM (Unverified) said
I'll just download it for free. :P
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 12:24PM McKeegan said
Like so many others have said, I'm done with Guitar Hero.
Harmonix is working hard for my money with weekly DLC (though, a lot of the recent DLC has been pretty sucky in my opinion).
Harmonix is working hard for my money with weekly DLC (though, a lot of the recent DLC has been pretty sucky in my opinion).
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 12:24PM (Unverified) said
I definitely wont be getting it. I gave up on the plastic and moved on to the real thing. I have the calluses to prove it!
Did that picture of the guitar hero-ised James made anyone else cringe?
Did that picture of the guitar hero-ised James made anyone else cringe?
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 1:28PM Duke said
In all fairness though, not everyone has the time and interest in playing the real guitar. Its fun to have friends come over and play these type games. It would be unrealistic to have people come over and hand them real guitars for party antics.
And yes, that picture is scary.
Reply
And yes, that picture is scary.
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 2:29PM (Unverified) said
You make a good point. It's a great to have that type of game at parties. But I was one those dudes who spent countless hours on my score and beating crazy songs (Jordan and TTFAF). But I got really annoyed by it. Ever since the first GH I've wanted to play Master of Puppets. So my co worker asked me, why wait for them? And sold me a squire with a little amp for $60.
It's not hard, it just takes time. I used to hate when people on youtube comments say this, but it's true. If I would have focused all my time and energy on the real thing instead of GH, I would of been a really good guitar player by now. But hey, we live and learn.
Reply
It's not hard, it just takes time. I used to hate when people on youtube comments say this, but it's true. If I would have focused all my time and energy on the real thing instead of GH, I would of been a really good guitar player by now. But hey, we live and learn.
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 12:29PM Emil K said
Yes I am getting this. GHWT was supposed to be last rhythm game I get, but I'll make an exception if Mastodon and Slayer is in it.
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 12:41PM baby sea tuna said
I'll only be picking this up if I can figure out a way to pirate it. Not because I want to play it, so much as because it would be a big "Fuck you" to both Metallica and Activision.
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 12:41PM OriginalWeJo said
i hope that file sharing factors into the band mode.
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 12:56PM baby sea tuna said
I'm hoping for a minigame where you can alienate and sue your fans!
Reply
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 12:51PM tigws6 said
Naptalllica blows.
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 1:15PM (Unverified) said
"One" is my least favorite song on GH 3. So no.
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 1:25PM captcarl said
They really captured Hetfield's bulging veins in his neck.
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 1:36PM gamabunta said
I saw GH:A on the clearance shelf at my local Target for $13 for all platforms. Still couldn't justify picking it up. I'll assume the same will happen to this 6 months after release.
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 1:42PM BobbyRobby said
I'm a huge Metallica fan (I know, people hate them, but whatever) and I'll get it as I haven't bought Rock Band 1 or 2 or GWT because all I care about are the guitar tracks.
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 1:52PM (Unverified) said
The majority of you on this board are morons.
Metallica's music is fucking awesome. The members in the band? Well they may leave a bit to be desired.
That being said, another new game/ is not the way to go IMO.
Harmonix. You're doin it right.
Activision. You're doin it wrong.
Metallica's music is fucking awesome. The members in the band? Well they may leave a bit to be desired.
That being said, another new game/ is not the way to go IMO.
Harmonix. You're doin it right.
Activision. You're doin it wrong.
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 4:04PM (Unverified) said
I will own the fuck out of this game
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 2:36PM (Unverified) said
No, as I cannot see myself paying for a standalone product that serves the exact same function as an existing product by the same company released only months prior unless it allows me to use content from both products in one of the two products (see: RB 1, RB 2, AC/DC pack, RB Track Pack 2).
With RB2, I mainly play online, play BWT, and bring it to parties/office events, so not having to swap disks is a huge benefit.
I'm also still refusing to buy Activision product after the whole PS3 guitar shenanigans (and I don't own a PS3).
Although, Queen is still tempting.
With RB2, I mainly play online, play BWT, and bring it to parties/office events, so not having to swap disks is a huge benefit.
I'm also still refusing to buy Activision product after the whole PS3 guitar shenanigans (and I don't own a PS3).
Although, Queen is still tempting.
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 2:03PM Negatron said
Buy this? Um...
NO!
Now if it were creed, that would be a different story.
:P
NO!
Now if it were creed, that would be a different story.
:P
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 2:56PM (Unverified) said
negative
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 2:22PM (Unverified) said
well, mostly post-black album material has made me not want this game.
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 2:57PM ChiTownRuler23 said
wow i cant wait to play saint anger on drums
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 3:29PM (Unverified) said
I'm getting it because I am a huge Metallica fan, and I don't care to play anything else on Guitar Hero or Rock Band other than Metallica songs. Industry opinions aside, the tracklist in this game will be well worth the $60 or so dollars to me. If you still feel the need to cling to those rebellious "I hate Metallica because they sold out and sued napster" feelings then knock yourself out. I'll be enjoying this game. I agree with the whole download thing, but I havent bought a GH game since GH2, and I refuse to buy Rock Band because of the fact that I spent $200 on the first band kit only to be left a year later with nothing but a bunch of broken instruments.
Fuck the Beatles. At least Metallica didn't come to the table with an ego so big that they wouldn't even allow them to put Guitar Hero in front of their name. I can do without the game anyways, seeing as how 90% of the songs will be about as challenging as playing hot cross buns on a recorder. The beatles are a great band, but they are far from the gods of rock and roll that they think they are, and it's too bad that 12-19 year old hippy spoiled suburbanite kids worship them still to this day.
Fuck the Beatles. At least Metallica didn't come to the table with an ego so big that they wouldn't even allow them to put Guitar Hero in front of their name. I can do without the game anyways, seeing as how 90% of the songs will be about as challenging as playing hot cross buns on a recorder. The beatles are a great band, but they are far from the gods of rock and roll that they think they are, and it's too bad that 12-19 year old hippy spoiled suburbanite kids worship them still to this day.
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 3:34PM (Unverified) said
Going to pick this one up. I don't own any GH or RB game's, but I've played alot of them at friends and family's houses. Im a huge Metallica fanboy so this is a no brainer.
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 3:50PM (Unverified) said
You guys do realize that by being a stand alone game and not just DLC that the game won't take up like 6 gigs of space on your hard drive right? Do you know how much time that would take to download? It would probably cost about 100 bucks too based on RB's DLC pricing. What about Wii huh, you would have to have an entire SD card just devoted to this game.
Also having it as a stand alone game is CHEAPER FOR YOU. Some of you guys may think it's an awesome idea to pay 6-10 bucks a week for 5 songs that, lets face it, have been pretty crappy since RB2 came out. Or you bought the AC/DC pack which was honestly a complete ripoff. I love those guys but I am not paying 40 bucks for 18 songs when for 20 bucks more I can have like 45 from an Aerosmith or Metallica (Dunno how many songs are on MT yet =\ ) Also hell you can always pick it up for cheap a few months later.
Maybe having it on a separate disc allows Neversoft to *gasp* change the look of the game! Something RB2 can learn from with RB1. Using some peoples logic on the board here, RB2 should have just been one big DLC pack. It looks like the exact same game and all it did was add songs make a few changes that could have just been easily patched in so why not? I don't hear people complaining about that.
Pause for a second, realize that Activision isn't out to eat your babies, and look at the two business models. I'm gonna choose the one that doesn't require me to spend about $750 to play all 500 songs that they have available. If you still think GH is the one that's flooding the market with crap and trying to steal your money, look at the past 2 months worth of DLC on RB and count up how much it would have cost you to buy those songs.
Also having it as a stand alone game is CHEAPER FOR YOU. Some of you guys may think it's an awesome idea to pay 6-10 bucks a week for 5 songs that, lets face it, have been pretty crappy since RB2 came out. Or you bought the AC/DC pack which was honestly a complete ripoff. I love those guys but I am not paying 40 bucks for 18 songs when for 20 bucks more I can have like 45 from an Aerosmith or Metallica (Dunno how many songs are on MT yet =\ ) Also hell you can always pick it up for cheap a few months later.
Maybe having it on a separate disc allows Neversoft to *gasp* change the look of the game! Something RB2 can learn from with RB1. Using some peoples logic on the board here, RB2 should have just been one big DLC pack. It looks like the exact same game and all it did was add songs make a few changes that could have just been easily patched in so why not? I don't hear people complaining about that.
Pause for a second, realize that Activision isn't out to eat your babies, and look at the two business models. I'm gonna choose the one that doesn't require me to spend about $750 to play all 500 songs that they have available. If you still think GH is the one that's flooding the market with crap and trying to steal your money, look at the past 2 months worth of DLC on RB and count up how much it would have cost you to buy those songs.
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 4:03PM (Unverified) said
All great points. +1
But then again, shhhh, dont come here saying things that make sense and are right.
Reply
But then again, shhhh, dont come here saying things that make sense and are right.
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 3:56PM (Unverified) said
Oh and don't bet on the Beatles being exportable. There is a reason they won't have "Rock Band" anywhere on that game. The deal was for a completely separate music game for the Beatles songs. Enjoy an entire game full of tier 1 songs. You may hate the band, but I would rather play the guitar solo to Puppets than "jam" along on 'Love Me Do'
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 4:45PM VaultBoy said
I'm not completely GH or RB, but consider that barring the songs available on the RB1 disc and the DLC that currently exists, there will likely not be any more Metallica available for RB in the forseeable future. It would be nice if Activision wouldn't charge full price for glorified expansions, however polished they may appear (GH:Aerosmith). At least in this case I doubt they could make me like the headlining band less, but there is still time. I'm getting this one, but learning the actual songs on the real thing will probably be far easier.
Posted: Dec 16th 2008 8:16PM Foetoid said
Wow, so many people not liking this game. Personally, i'm a big Metallica fan and i will be picking this up on launch.
Posted: Dec 17th 2008 2:57AM (Unverified) said
I do like Metallica's music. If I get to copy the tracks to World Tour, I might get it.
I'd probably rather just pick up the Puppets album for Rock Band as DLC though.
I'd probably rather just pick up the Puppets album for Rock Band as DLC though.
Posted: Dec 17th 2008 3:39PM overflow said
i would run through fire to get the disk!!
but only if i can buy ONLY the disk and if its compatible to the 4 drums 2333 guitars and 239232 microphones that are hidden under my sofa...
but only if i can buy ONLY the disk and if its compatible to the 4 drums 2333 guitars and 239232 microphones that are hidden under my sofa...
Featured Stories
Super Joystiq Podcast 004: 38 Studios meltdown, Gravity Rush, Civilization 5: Gods & Kings, Dragon's Dogma
Posted on May 25th 2012 3:30PM