The Beatles: Rock Band DLC to include Sgt. Pepper's, Rubber Soul albums

Same here!

I agree.. it makes me go why isn't this just in the game.. are they going to have the worst songs in game and the iconic albums as extra money.. smells like a bait and switch to me....

I think it was pretty well understood that the $60 game was not going to include all 200+ songs from the Beatles catalog. For people who want to know that they will be able to fill out the catalog with DLC, this is a big positive.

If it angers you that every Beatles song will not be included on the game disc, then you should be pleased with this announcement, so that you know not to buy the game.

Everything I've read so far points to having to, you know, buy the game before you can get the DLC. It was my understanding that The Beates: Rock Band would be an entirely separate game experience, and the songs, DLC included, would not carry over into other titles.

I'd love for someone to tell me I'm mistaken, though.

@ copa - the thing that gets me is that I'm going to put out $60 at retail + an additional $20 or so per DLC which turns the game into a $120 purchase.

You may not be familiar with how Rock Band DLC works. Couple of notes about this:

1) There's already songs from both albums confirmed on the disc. This information is readily available around the Interwebz.

2) A "full album" DLC release will be all songs on the album OR all songs on the album that aren't already on disc. The DLC bundle is then discounted the value of however many songs it lacks. And traditionally, the song on disc has been a recognizeable hit.

For example, the following DLC album packs contained one song already on disc:

1) "Doolittle" - The Pixies (Wave of Mutiliation)
2) "Peace Sells...but Who's Buying" - Megadeth (Peace Sells)
3) "The Colour and the Shape" - Foo Fighters (Everlong)
4) "Ten" - Pearl Jam (Alive)
5) "Nothing's Shocking" - Jane's Addiction (Mountain Song)
6) "Chinese Democracy" - Guns n' Roses (Shackler's Revenge)
7) "Blood Sugar Sex Magik" - Red Hot Chili Peppers (Give it Away)

So no, just because the album's coming as DLC later doesn't mean songs from them will NOT be on disc. In fact, roughly 25-30 of the songs in the game have been confirmed at this point.

I think its a great idea for music games. It takes time to chart all these songs and if you want to have all the songs available on disc we would have to wait much longer to have the game due to it getting delayed so the songs can be completed and ready to go.

I would much prefer the remainder of the Beatles songs that don't make the disc get released eventually as DLC so I can have pretty much the entire discography on that game. I can guarantee you I will purchase all the songs.

Game is £40, for that you'd at least ask for a shitload of songs, let alone they have the cheek to announce downloadable albums before the fucking thing's even out.

What the hell is wrong with you people, today?

Are you surprised that Harmonix announces that there is Beatles DLC coming to a Beatles: Rock Band game??!?!

So, do you prefer no DLC then? Or maybe they should stop relasing DLC for standard Rock Band as well, because it's becoming too costy?

IT'S CLEAR AS DAY: A rhythm game will get DLC. Especially Beatles.

Also, a few songs from those albums are already confirmed to be IN the main game. The rest is optional. Nobody is forcing you to buy the whole Beatles discography. And there's many reasons to why it's not included on the disc.

a) There's a limit to what a disc can hold.
b) Instead of stuffing as many songs as possible ASAP, how about building a great experience around a themed song list and let USERS build songs around it based on DLC.
c) A disc with all the Beatles track ever made would be the worst compilation ever. Seriously, who wants to play Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da or Revolution #9...

Seriously guys. Butthurt much?
What's wrong with announcing: "So yeah, there will be a selection of Sgt Peppers songs on disc, but if you like more, we will release the rest as DLC."

They are not shipping an incomplete product. It's impossible to 'complete' it. There's hundreds Beatles songs. They can't fit them all, but they are still giving you a chance to pick and choose more, if you wish.

I don't think anybody was moaning when Sony/Microsoft announced that when they release Singstar/Lips there will be a Music Store to download new tracks from (outrage!, I know! buy MORE SONGS FOR MY GAME?! WTF?!)

@ The Baron...

You can currently get the 3 Beatles anthology discs for a total of £47.24 on Amazon UK, so yes they should give you all the Songs for 40 quid and refund you the extra 7.24 and develop the game for free.

Can we invent a new term for people that expect developers to give them everything and the kitchen sink for the price of a Happy Meal. Maybe a whole new class of economics, Idiot Economics.

A Rock band game comes with regular DLC, are you surprised? It’s one of the great things about Rock Band.

@Archon: I'd pay to play "Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da."

Rock Band 2 = 100+ songs for £40. Only so much can fit on the disc? Do you remember GTA San Andreas on the PS2? That, along with about 10 hours of soundtrack + voice acting fit on a DVD.

I buy a lot of RB DLC. I appreciate that they make it, and that I can add new content to my game months after it's out.

I don't appreciate spending the same amount of money on less than half the songs, on a game which is titled 'Beatles' (and so you'd expect it to be as much Beatles as they can give you) when before the thing is even out, they're talking about making extra content that you have to buy. They could probably code all those songs in about two weeks if they weren't so intent on ripping you off for a complete experience.

Yes, you can claim that I have some feeling of entitlement. That would be because I'm spending money on it already.

Now you get the pleasure of buying them again.

+1


I just realized, doesn't it look like my avatar is screaming for the Beatles?

i'm curious as to how "A Day in the Life" and "When I'm Sixty Four" would translate to Rock Band, seeing as they aren't too guitar or drum heavy.

Yeah, The title track, as well as "With a Little Help from my Friends", and "Within You Without You".

BUT LOVELY RITA AND GOOD MORNING WILL BE IN!!!!

Today is a great day.

It is on the disk so is little help from our friends. it's one big song in the game.

I know right? Hell, I want every album up for DLC. I'd gladly buy it all. Along with the $200 Mono Box set.... and $12 each for the albums missing from the box set....
Shit...

Give me Revolver or Give me Death!

There'll be more albums down the pipeline. It wouldn't really make sense for Harmonix to announce the game's entire future DLC catalog up front, would it?

The beatles have more hits than any other band ever. They also have some of the best full album listening experiences you can get. The game disc includes most of the hits. The DLC fills in the gaps and gives the customers who want that full album experience, the full album. You're not being short changed.

I remember now that there are supposed to be 45 on-disc tracks (the same as the first Rock Band), it just feels odd to have a lower number of songs than the last game released. Is the difference caused by the cost of licensing or some other contract reason? I guess the upside is that they will most likely all be songs that I love.

Not the entire album, just the remaining songs that don't make it on disc.

Why is that a problem?

are you people shitting me? downvoted?! how are you not appalled that there are a measley 45 songs on the disc?!

rockband 1 had 58 songs

rockband 2 had 84 songs

I don't care if this disc pure hits from the beatles, but they should seriously have included more songs. This is almost as pathetic as the GH: Van Halen game, which btw you can now get for free.

yes

This is very similar to what I was referring to. Lowering the number of songs on-disc and simultaneously announcing oodles of DLC feels cheap. As I said above, it could have to do with licensing costs or some other contract obligation.

It would be interesting if they would allow players to download 10 free DLC songs of their choosing. 55 songs would soften the blow, especially when the player has some say in the list.

The Beatles license is was probably more expensive than the 80+ songs combined.

Just saying.

Also, what's with all the moaners on Joystiq today?...

If you are going to blame anyone blame the Beatles themselves. They have control over this game and what songs appear in it. Paul has veto power on everything. All the songs picked are to give you the definitive Beatles experience. Not saying it's right or wrong but you are getting some damn good tracks for 60 bucks.

You guys are idiots. Some numbers:

- Guitar Hero: Aerosmith - 41 songs, 29 from Aerosmith, no DLC
- Guitar Hero: Metallica - 49 songs, 28 from Metallica, only Death Magnetic as DLC
- Guitar Hero: Van Halen - 44 songs, 25 from Van Halen, unknown DLC

vs.

- Beatles Rock Band - 45 songs, 45 from the Beatles, with potentially all of their albums coming as DLC

Hmmm, one of the greatest bands in history, with a game full of their songs, with awesome customized visuals, and access to practically any other song of their that you want _OR_ some pretty popular bands, but not all their best songs (especially with regard to Aerosmith) and no access to the rest of their catalog, and the rest of the game with filler?

Where do you think the better value is?

@aristokrat
want to know the better value? check this

GH: Aerosmith = 29.99
GH:Metallica = 59.99
GH:Van Halen = Free with purchase of GH5(Total of 129 songs) = 59.99

Don't call us idiots when you don't even understand the situation yourself, you duchebach.

bag*

*douche

I'll concede Aerosmith apparently had a sale price of only $30 at launch, but it is easily the worst of the group, missing so many good Aerosmith songs and containing only guitar parts.

I don't see how listing the price of Metallica makes your point, as the Beatles game will also be $60 and GH:Metallica loses on all other fronts. And further proving my point, Activision realized what a rip-off GH:VH would be so they're trying to give it away in order to sell GH5. You can tell GH:VH is a total rush-job based on the wild assortment of extra tracks they added (Fountains of Wayne?). And by giving you GH:VH with GH5, they've basically managed to bring the total song count up to that of Rock Band 2 (if bought new, but the same applies for GH5+VH). I bet Activision is planning on breaking even by selling one VH for every one they give away, making the average price what it is truly worth.

Oh, wait, Xbox.com to the rescue:
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/games/g/ghaerosmith/default.htm

Looks like Aerosmith started at $60 as well, so get out of here, you lose.

Aristokrat, you are a fucking idiot for one reason and one reason alone:

Nobody here was saying that it was ok for GH games to rip us off, but not The Beatles. It's like you invented your own argument to wage against some imaginary adversary.

So shut the fuck up, and the same goes for the assholes who are upvoting him.

This is all there is to it: Rock Band 2 had 80+ songs on disc plus 20 free DLC for $60. The Beatles: Rock Band has way less than half that amount for the same price. Normally, I would be willing to suck it up and pay, but the fact that they clearly have a shit-ton of songs licensed and ready to release as DLC tells me that they realize that they can get away with overcharging for the game in the first place and then charging us even more for the content that we realistically already payed for.

I'm sorry if you are a sucker for their bullshit, but I refuse to sponsor it.

You think Harmonix had to pay to get those 20 bonus songs? Seeing as they are all bands that feature Harmonix members that want to get their music out there? I'm sure it was the bare minimum cost for those songs.

My point with GH was that they are following precedent, and besting it. You obviously bought GH:Aerosmith, and it was a much worse value (musical tastes aside).