Kotaku
Activision CEO Bobby Kotick spoke today at the Morgan Stanley Technology Conference about the challenges facing his company, responding to concerns about growth on a few of its key franchises, like Call of Duty and Guitar Hero. While Kotick was wise to avoid revealing specifics, he may have let slip the next artist-focused Guitar Hero title. If true, it may be a very good fit.
Early in the Q&A session, Kotick talked about opportunities for new platforms and "line extensions" for the Guitar Hero franchise, which we can theorize mean things like Guitar Hero: On Tour for portables and DJ Hero. Kotick also talked about bands that were "proprietary to our format," including Aerosmith.
Kotick later talked about Aerosmith again, in response to a line of questioning about artists finding themselves making big bucks off Guitar Hero tracks. He said of the opportunity, "If we're [...] creating a whole new group of consumers, six to eleven year old consumers, who are being exposed to Aerosmith for the first time or Van Halen for the first time, whatever that might be we need to capture much more of that upside opportunity."
Now, Kotick may just be a big fan of Eddie Van Halen, but the profits to be had selling a licensed Kramer 5150 Guitar Hero guitar controller may have just gotten Bobby a bit too excited. Based on what the Activision CEO said, expect more artist-only titles, and consider Van Halen a fairly safe bet.
Comments
Sounds good to me!
Guitar Hero: VAN HALEN could kick some serious ass :D
Is there anyone else who views these artist-only titles as totally pointless?
Sigh.
These artist exclusive games seem a bit unexciting to me. I think they'll be a bad idea in the long run.
A Black Sabbath one with both Ozzy and Dio would be nice though. Or perhaps a Queen one. Maybe the Smiths...
Oh crap, the idea is growing on me! Help!
Guitar Hero: Running it into the Ground Edition.
THPS style.
Still waiting on Rock Band Nirvana...
I want variety, not 1 artist only junk...ACTIVISION FAIL
Sigh. Another day, another Activision milking.
@TOWER_JUNKIE:
You should see my store manager. The mere mention of Guitar Hero: Aerosmith sends him into a rage.
@TheCleaningGuy: Yeah, but it would get too "samey" after a while. The great part about these games is their variety. The most we should want is an album, not everything by them.
+ Watch video
I think the artist-specific titles are going to really clutter up the franchise. I don't see the point for releasing a whole other game for specific artists rather than continuing to sell song packs for a way cheaper price.
@TOWER_JUNKIE: More than you'll ever know. Or perhaps you know.
The artist-centric titles of the Guitar Hero series are simply Activision trying to squeeze every penny out of the consumer. The chances of these titles being anything other than sub par, regardless of the artist featured, are minuscule on the smallest of scales. Case in point being Guitar Hero: Rocks the 80s. This game still has a $50 dollar price tag and is the biggest disappointment in the series to date. A lesson is not being learned by Activision. Unless these artist titles are released for less than $30, the fans will not clamor to own the game. So it can perhaps be percieved that this Activision's desperate attempt to prevent Rock Band from taking hold. A seemingly futile attempt, as prices will sway in favor of the consumer at a point, and songs have the potential to keep being added for roughly the same price of another game disc. Please try something interesting or worthwhile Activision. Here's hoping DJ Hero will come, although it will probably end up as just a rip off of Beatmania.
The annoying thing about this all is that you just know Activision's going to try to find a way to bundle in some NEW AND SPECIAL guitar peripheral for each artist-specific game, for maximum potential consumer milkage.
Wish there were some DLR-era VH on Rock Band.
The single artist thing could be cool, but it could also turn a lot of people off. I think they should do more themed editions, like GH: Classic Rock, GH: Heavy Metal, GH: Punk & Ska, GH: Psychedelic Rock, etc. instead of just one dude. If it is going to be one band, make it like Nirvana or something more people can get down with.
That said, I'd much rather play the Van Halen edition then Aerosmith, but I'm such and addict on GH, I'll probably buy both.
What about GH: Bob Marley Edition. Who doesn't like Marley?
@Nesagwa:
A-Goddamn-men.
I'd get it, if it was DLR only, but you know it won't be.
They'd probably include that lame-ass Crystal Pepsi ad.
+ Watch video
@kidko:
Heh, I once heard a story where Van Halen opened AND closed their show with Jump.
"Oh, he's going back to the keyboards!"
Agreed, I'd be interested *IF* it was download, I don't want to shell out another $50 per artist every time for a few songs of theirs that I might enjoy. They could have easily just added character downloads and album packs instead and not charged the price of a full game which I know is what they'll do.
I'll keep playing Rock Band thanks and enjoying the variety.
GH:Van Halen would be the first and likely only spinoff disc I would buy. Van Halen kicks ass!
If this is true it is HORRIBLE news because it means no Van Halen for Rock Band. If I can't drum Panama then to hell with everything.
Guitar Hero 3 is so bad it brings Rock Band down into its crap hole. I hate it.
instead of guitar hero, i would rather have van halen guitar.
My only concern is single artist games locking them out for rockband or vice versa. Music with all its genres never has had universal appeal, but if single artist guita hero games are where they want to take it thats fine.
As a previous poster said GuitarHero: running it into the group edition.
but if these artists then lock users out of dlc content thats when we start losing not the developers.
@Padriac:
This is a good point...first we have Sony and Microsoft throwing money around and fighting over exclusive games...now we have Harmonix and Activision fighting over exclusive bands? Jesus Christ, this generation is petty.
@xboxsab: "DLH era" does not need mentioning, as there is no other Van Halen.
If you want a real challenge, try Guitar Hero: Leo Kottke Edition.
If they go for Van Halen they better make sure that it is ACTUALLY VAN HALEN. Doing more covers *may* actually make it worse than 'Van Hagar'.
I obviously still can't get over how shitty the covers were in GH:III, I cried at how terrible "Pride and Joy" by Stevie Ray Vaughan was...
@Sheen_Latrine: The peoblem here is that this is true for pretty much everybody. They all have this ONE band that they will buy NO MATTER WHAT. For me, it would be Green Day. For someone else it's going to be Metallica, for someone else it will be The Beatles.
And as long as there are enough of "that one person" buying the game themed off one Band, they will continue to do it. Remember "Rocks the 80's"? The exact same game as guitar hero 2 but with different character skins and different COLORS for the song selections, oh yeah don't forget different songs. They will continue to do that. Over and over and over.
I'm not buying it for sure, ..... unless they do a Green Day one.
Sigh
@Nesagwa: Took the words out of my mouth.
There's only one band deserving of its own rock simulator. Led Zeppelin.
Personally, I think these artist-speciffic Guitar Hero games could be a good idea, if they make enough of them with varied enough bands. I'm sure that even naysayers would get excited if a game based on their favourite band was announced.
@Erwin: But have you heard THAT version? wait until Eddie comes in. Oooh yeah
SOLD
SO FUCKING SOLD
I'm so very, very torn on all of this.
First off, I love the Guitar Hero games. It's an addiction in my life that's bigger than WoW ever was with me. I bought in at the first game and now am the proud owner of all 4 games for the PS2. New songs are great, and one part of me screams "bring on as many expansion packs and artist only games as you want". But then, I think of the price. 50 bucks for what amounts to 30 songs? 80s was a hard pill to swallow in and of itself. I don't know if I could do that 2 or 3 times a year instead of waiting for a full fledged sequel with added content and such, not to mention a diverse and varied track list.
I've had some hands on experience with Rock Band and Guitar Hero 3 on the Xbox 360, and I almost think DLC might be the right way to go here instead of retail discs of what amounts to new songs. Obviously, there would have to be some sort of change in the prices that are charged (even a dollar a track when you're buying 30 at once is better than nothing) and it ensures that the game lasts longer instead of NEEDING the full sequel to keep gamers happy.
Then we have Rock Band, which I believe blows the pants off of Guitar Hero as a whole. As a single game just on Guitar it isn't anything special (although Green Grass and High Tides IS amazing), but when you have a full band it's one of the best social games I've played. Add new music to that in large packs (like they're planning to do with full albums like Nirvana's Nevermind album). I think that's going to work far better than a new retail game with new songs and not much else.
*looks up* Holy crap, wall of text crits me for 1000. To keep the end short, I think that the idea of new songs and full artist albums are GOOD, just not in a pressed disc form, and I'm one to side with more fleshed out DLC choices.
-nesdude
I don't think the 80's version, or Aerosmith justify's being a full 50-60 bucks.
There are two versions I would love to see:
Guitar Hero: Pink Floyd. 'Nuff fucking said.
Guitar Hero: 60s/70s Soul/Funk collection. James Brown, Isaac Hayes, Curtis Mayfield, Bootsy Collins, that type of shit.
If I said it once I've said it a hundred times, Activision is taking the bullet train down the shitter with the Guitar Hero franchise, 3 was overall a pretty lackluster title, very little songs worth playing more than once, terrible DLC, horrendous ports to the Wii and ps2, I think I'll stick with Harmonix and Rock Band kthxbye.
I demand Guitar Hero: Incubus.
Or an Incubus song that's not a shitty cover.
...
I don't like Van Halen.
I just don't.
@boxofthegods:
The inclusion of the real artists for the majority of tracks did nothing for you? That was a pretty big step for the series.
I really dont like the idea of a artist specific guitar hero game. Its pointless and stupid. I can think of only one game that should be released like this, led zeppelin but should include alot of stuff from their early live shows that wasnt released on albums.
Isn't prostitution illegal? Because it seems to me that Activision is slapping 25 cent lipstick on Guitar Hero and sending it out to the street corner.
This is stupid!! if they are goign to release anything in between now and guitar hero 4, they should release "Expansion packs" that have the online trakcs for people that don't ahve highspeed.
Hopefully, they will make these artist specific versions expansions. It would be much better if these can just be added to GH3 so you can just have a really large set list for the one game rather than having to swap out discs. Also, I'm hoping that these will be priced as expansions rather than full releases.
@Legendary GIR: The Rock Band covers were much worse. The cover of Tom Sawyer made me weep. Besides, at least with Aerosmith, it sounds like they would be working closely enough with the band that there won't be covers.
@Padriac: How is GH3 bad? If you didn't like the battles, it is such a small part of the game that it shouldn't have effected your overall view of the game. At least the GH controller actually works.
to me these artist specific releases are almost as dumb as if Nintendo would replace the Mario model in Mario galaxy and add a sprite of donkey kong....OK maybe not quite that dumb. Same game with new tracks that could have been DL content. for shame!!
You can't have versions of GH with bands like Green Day and Nirvana because the game would simply be too damn easy. There's a reason why all those pop songs are the lower tier stuff while all the stuff that actually requires decent skill is in the higher tiers and mostly Metal.
Bands like the ones I mentioned would be a better fit for Rock Band but in a game where skill and guitarwork are appreciated they have no place other than the 1st tier of songs.
Blink 182, Nirvana (aside from Grohl, who is a great musician) Green Day, etc really don't have any impressive guitar work at all in their entire catalogs. Just a few catchy riffs here and there but nothing that couldn't be learned in 5 minutes by a beginner.
I would like to cast my vote for
Guitar Hero: Iron Maiden
have fun learning those songs.
I would consider buying a Van Halen edition.
As long as it has Hot For Teacher, of course.
Ugg, Im tired of "Guitar Hero: Mediocre Bands"
Let's get "Queen" in there please.